Tall buildings like burj khalifa have wide foundations why? ?

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:

gpe = mass x gravity constant x height or… gpe = mgh

where… mass: measured in kilograms (kg)

gravity: gravity constant on earth = 10.00 m/s2

height: measured in meters (m)

gpe: measured in joules (j) or kilojoules (kj)

how do you solve gpe?

gravitational potential energy (gpe) is the energy an object has because of its position above the. ground.

gpe = mass x gravity constant x height or… gpe = mgh.

mass:

note: to earn full marks when solving science word problems, you must show your work:

formula.

example:

given values:

mass = 0.3 kg.

initial speed when it is dropped is 150 ft/s

now at the same moment the acceleration due to gravity is perpendicular to its velocity

so as we know that

now we have centripetal acceleration a = 32 ft/s^2 as its perpendicular to velocity

while tangential acceleration at the same moment will be zero

so

now radius of curvature is given as

so the radius of curvature just after it is dropped is 703.125 ft

electrical potential energy =0.072 j

explanation:

electrical potential energy is given by

u= q δv

q= charge=6 c

δv= potential difference and is given by

δv= e d

e= electric field

d= distance=5 mm=0.005 m

δv=2.4 (0.005)=0.012 v

now electric potential energy= u= q δv

u=6 (0.012)

u=0.072 j