What is the energy of an object because of its potential and kinetic energies? a.)chemical energy b.)electrical energy c.)nuclear energy d.)mechanical energy

Potential energy is the energy a mass has because of its height above the ground.  Kinetic energy is the energy a mass has because of its motion.  Together, they're called the mechanical energy that the mass has. (D)

D.)mechanical energy

Explanation:

What is the energy of an object because of its potential and kinetic energies?

Energy is the ability to do work

potential energy is the energy possessed by a body due to its position/height whilst kinetic energy is the energy of an object due to motion. A bird resting on the branch of a tree , height 5m from te round as a potential energy .A car in motion possesses kinetic energy.

The potential energy in the bow limbs is transformed into the kinetic energy of the arrow as it takes flight. In physics, potential energy is the energy held by an object because of its position relative to other objects, stresses within itself, its electric charge, or other factor

Potential energy and kinetic energy are examples of mechanical energy.

In physical sciences, mechanical energy is the sum of potential energy and kinetic energy. It is the energy associated with the motion and position of an object. On the other hand, it will have its least kinetic energy and greatest potential ... of the mechanical energies of the colliding objects is the same before and after.

relativism, roughly put, is the view that truth and falsity, right and wrong, standards of reasoning, and procedures of justification are products of differing conventions and frameworks of assessment and that their authority is confined to the context giving rise to them. more precisely, “relativism” covers views which maintain that—at a high level of abstraction—at least some class of things have the properties they have (e.g., beautiful, morally good, epistemically justified) not simpliciter, but only relative to a given framework of assessment (e.g., local cultural norms, individual standards), and correspondingly, that the truth of claims attributing these properties holds only once the relevant framework of assessment is specified or supplied. relativists characteristically insist, furthermore, that if something is only relatively so, then there can be no framework-independent vantage point from which the matter of whether the thing in question is so can be established.

relativism has been, in its various guises, both one of the most popular and most reviled philosophical doctrines of our time. defenders see it as a harbinger of tolerance and the only ethical and epistemic stance worthy of the open-minded and tolerant. detractors dismiss it for its alleged incoherence and uncritical intellectual permissiveness. debates about relativism permeate the whole spectrum of philosophical sub-disciplines. from ethics to epistemology, science to religion, political theory to ontology, theories of meaning and even logic, philosophy has felt the need to respond to this heady and seemingly subversive idea. discussions of relativism often also invoke considerations relevant to the very nature and methodology of philosophy and to the division between the so-called “analytic and continental” camps in philosophy. and yet, despite a long history of debate going back to plato and an increasingly large body of writing, it is still difficult to come to an agreed definition of what, at its core, relativism is, and what philosophical import it has. this entry attempts to provide a broad account of the many ways in which “relativism” has been defined, explained, defended and criticized.

explanation:

v 154.9= 0.9 length length s little over 154.9cm