The modern model of the atom describes electrons in a little less specific detail than earlier models did. Why is it that being less sure about the placement of electrons in an atom is actually an improvement over earlier models? Electrons do not follow specific paths, so describing the area where an electron is likely to be is more scientifically accurate.
Electrons were thought to be negatively charged, but now scientists know that their charge depends on their energy level.
The modern model is based on mathematical equations, so the results become less clear when the decimals are rounded.
The position of electrons in atomic models has changed so much that it is better to have a less specific model than to be wrong again.

explanation:

the masses of the objects and the distance between them

answer: 2×10^-2kg

explanation: density= mass per volume

vol=mass/density

converting to s.i units we have;

3÷1000kg = 0.003

1.5÷100m = 0.15

0.003/0.15 = 0.02kg

note: the given question is incomplete.

complete question is given below.

which is an example of kinetic energy?

a. the energy stored in ethanol  

b. a hockey puck sliding across the ice  

c. a compressed spring  

d. a ball sitting at the top of a ramp

solution: the kinetic energy is the energy posses by the virtue of the motion of the object.

in the given options, a, c and d are the example of potential energy because it is the energy posses by the virtue of the rest of the object. but option b has the kinetic energy as the object is in motion.

hence, a hockey puck sliding across the ice   is the apex example of kinetic energy.

so, the option (b) a hockey puck sliding across the ice   is the correct option.