NEED HELP ASAP!! Lisa and Cory are having a debate about gravitation. Lisa says that the astronauts in that international Space Station (which is a distance of about 6800 km from Earth’s center) are too far away from Earth to experience Earth’s gravitational pull, and that is why they float. Cory insists that Lisa is incorrect. Which of them is correct in their statement, and why?

Only Cory is correct

Step-by-step explanation:

The gravitational pull of the Earth on a person or object is given by Newton's law of gravitation as follows;

Where;

G = The universal gravitational constant

M = The mass of one object

m = The mass of the other object

r = The distance between the centers of the two objects

For the gravitational pull of the Earth on a person, when the person is standing on the Earth's surface, r = R = The radius of the Earth ≈ 6,371 km

Therefore, for an astronaut in the international Space Station, r = 6,800 km

The ratio of the gravitational pull on the surface of the Earth, F₁, and the gravitational pull on an astronaut at the international space station, F₂, is therefore given as follows;

∴ F₁ ≈ 1.14 × F₂

F₂ ≈ 0.8778 × F₁

Therefore, the gravitational pull on the astronaut by virtue of the distance from the center of the Earth, F₂ is approximately 88% of the gravitational pull on a person of similar mass on Earth

However, the International Space Station is moving in its orbit around the Earth at an orbiting speed enough to prevent the Space Station from falling to the Earth such that the Space Station falls around the Earth because of the curved shape of the gravitational attraction, such that the astronaut are constantly falling (similar to falling from height) and appear not to experience gravity

Therefore, Cory is correct, the astronauts in the International Space Station, 6,800 km from the Earth's center, are not too far to experience gravity.

answer: there are 453.592 grams in a pound.

i think it's eleven too, don't woosh me here, but according to the "experts" it's 2.

the proof starts from the peano postulates, which define the natural

numbers n. n is the smallest set satisfying these postulates:

  p1.   1 is in n.

  p2.   if x is in n, then its "successor" x' is in n.

  p3.   there is no x such that x' = 1.

  p4.   if x isn't 1, then there is a y in n such that y' = x.

  p5.   if s is a subset of n, 1 is in s, and the implication

      (x in s => x' in s) holds, then s = n.

then you have to define addition recursively:

  def: let a and b be in n. if b = 1, then define a + b = a'

      (using p1 and p2). if b isn't 1, then let c' = b, with c in n

      (using p4), and define a + b = (a + c)'.

then you have to define 2:

  def:   2 = 1'

2 is in n by p1, p2, and the definition of 2.

theorem:   1 + 1 = 2

proof: use the first part of the definition of + with a = b = 1.

      then 1 + 1 = 1' = 2   q.e.d.

note: there is an alternate formulation of the peano postulates which

replaces 1 with 0 in p1, p3, p4, and p5. then you have to change the

definition of addition to this:

  def: let a and b be in n. if b = 0, then define a + b = a.

      if b isn't 0, then let c' = b, with c in n, and define

      a + b = (a + c)'.

you also have to define 1 = 0', and 2 = 1'. then the proof of the

theorem above is a little different:

proof: use the second part of the definition of + first:

      1 + 1 = (1 + 0)'

      now use the first part of the definition of + on the sum in

      parentheses:   1 + 1 = (1)' = 1' = 2   q.e.d.