Aconvex lens is a transparent instrument that uses refraction to bend and focus light from an object, forming a sharp image. we'll first investigate how the lens produces an image from a point source of light (a lamp). select screen at upper right, which makes the object a lamp and gives a black screen that can be dragged around. select many rays at upper left to see how the lens bends some of the rays of light from the lamp. with the lamp positioned far to the left of the lens, you should see that the rays that go through the lens converge to a point. if the screen is placed where the beams converge, the image on the screen will be in focus (it will be a small dot of light since that is what the object looks like in this case). the screen is then at the focal plane. as the lamp is moved closer to the lens, the distance between the focal plane and the lens

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:

well, you would divide 135 by 33 to get your answer. then that is how many seconds it would take. boardman should fly about 132 m or 4.090909090909091 seconds.

0.11 m/s and 0.28 m/s should be correct

answer;

d. are made mostly of liquid

explanation;

-the general   composition and structure planets includes; they have a thick gas and liquid layer covering a small,solid core. mostly the gases are hydrogen and helium atmosphere and layers of liquid hydrogen. for instance neptune and uranus are examples of the outer planets, they have a core covered by ice and ammonia.

-neptune's atmosphere is hydrogen and helium with a bit of methane so there is no oxygen to breath and the interior is made up of frozen water and ammonia with a rock and iron core. thus, there is no liquid water or solid surface to survive.