Which statement best explains the fallacy in the
argument?

vanderwaal's forces of attraction are the electrostatic intermolecular forces that exist in a molecule due to the temporary or permanent dipoles that are developed in a molecule. in , the major intermolecular forces are dipole-dipole interactions as the molecule is polar (bent structure). so the vanderwaal's forces of interaction in between molecules are the permanent dipole-dipole interactions that develop due to the dipole that exists in between the polar h - s bond. the positively charged hydrogen atom is attracted towards the negative end of the dipole that is sulfur of the adjacent molecule. therefore, these forces of attraction are relatively stronger than that of london dispersion forces that exist in non polar molecules.

the number of valence electrons for each molecule or ion is shown beneath the structure. remember hydrogen will not have more than two electrons. this hydrogen is part of a covalent bond (sharing two electrons). a double bond here would cause hydrogen to share four electrons with phosphorus.

all eukaryotic cell have mitochondria : )

c. electrical charges of ionic bonds.