Hurry i need it asap
geologists study the density of seismic activity in a region by comparing the number of earthquakes to the area of the region. the seismic activity density of a region is found using the formula: seismic activity density = . the state of california covers approximately 103,718 mi2, and has a seismic activity density of 0.0964 earthquakes per square mile. the state of alaska covers approximately 570,641 mi2, and has a seismic activity density of 0.0491. using this data and rounding to the nearest whole number, alaska had more earthquakes than california for the year. why would the seismic activity density of the year for alaska be smaller than for california if alaska had more earthquakes?

Alaska has more land area than California

Explanation:

The seismic activity density of a region is the ratio of the number of earthquakes during a given period to the land area:

Seismic activity density = number of earthquakes/land area

If California has 103,718 mi2, and a seismic activity density of 0.0964, then:

density of 0.0964 = number of earthquakes/103,718 mi2

0.0964*103,718 = 9,998 earthquakes

If Alaska has 570,641 mi2, and a seismic activity of 0.0491, then:

density of 0.0491 = number of earthquakes/570,641 mi2

0.0491*570,641 = 28,018 earthquakes

Even though Alaska has a greater amount of earthquakes, California has a greater density, because it has less land.

it is very hard for the climatologists to precisely predict how will the global temperatures be changing so there's lots of models, some of which differ significantly, this is due to multiple factors, and probably the most important is the human activity.

humans have been a key factor in climate change around the globe since the start of the industrial revolution, and in the past few decades the consequences are becoming more obvious. there's lots of emission of pollutants in the atmosphere as well as changing the environment on the surface itself, so it's really hard to predict how will that go in the future because there's some countries that are reducing the damage and are going towards green energy, while others are stubbornly continuing with pollution and damages to the environment.