Why would the climates of Austin, Texas and St. Paul, Minnesota be different? (use the map)

a St. Paul is much warmer than Austin due to its closeness to the Great Lakes.
b St. Paul is at a higher latitude than Austin. The farther from the equator you are, the colder it is.
c The Altitude in Austin is much greater than in St. Paul, making Austin much colder
d The climates of both cities are very similar since they are almost lined up north and south of each other.

b

Explanation:

b is the right answer as latitude and distance from equator need to be considered when talking about climate

first let us lay out the formula for potential

and kinetic energy:

pe = mgh

ke = (mv^2)/2

where: m=mass, v=velocity, g=gravitational

acceleration, h=height

calculating for mass using the known values of

pe:

340j = m (9.81 m/s^2) (50ft) (1m/3.28ft)

m = 2.27 kg

the law of conservation of energy states that

energy is neither created nor destroyed. therefore, the change in kinetic

energy from 50 ft to 35 ft would be equal to the change in potential energy

from 50 ft to 35 ft. however it would be opposite in signs since one is losing

while other is gaining.

ke(35ft) – ke(50ft) = - [ pe(35ft) – pe(50ft]

ke(50ft) = 0 since the brick is initially at rest

ke(35ft) = 340j - 2.27kg (9.81 m/s^2) (35ft)

(1m/3.28 ft)

ke(35ft)

= 102.38 j

periodic trends is an atom that gets larger as the number of electronic shells increase, the radius of atoms increases as you go down a certain group in the periodic table of elements. in general, the size of an atom will decrease as you move from left to right of a certain period.