a block of mas \( m \) = 4.8 kg slides head on into a spring of spring constant \( k \) = 430 N/m. When the block stops, it has compressed the spring by 5.8 cm. The coefficient of kinetic friction between block and floor is 0.28. \( (g =9.8m/s^2) \)

See explanation below

Explanation:

The question is incomplete. The missing part of this question is the following:

"While the block is in contact with the spring and being brought to rest, what are (a)the work done by the spring force and (b) the increase in thermal energy of the blockfloor system? (c) What is the blocks speed just as it reaches the spring?"

According to this we need to calculate three values: Work, Thermal Energy and Speed of the block when it reaches the spring.

Let's do this by parts.

a) Work done by the spring:

In this case, we need to apply the following expression:

W = -1/2 kx²  (1)

We know that k = 430 N/m, and x is the distance of compressed spring which is 5.8 cm (or 0.058 m). Replacing that into the expression:

W = -1/2 * 430 * (0.058)²

b) Increase in thermal energy

In this case we need to use the following expression:

ΔEt = Fk * x   (2)

And Fk is the force of the kinetic energy which is:

Fk = μk * N   (3)

Where μk is the coeffient of kinetic friction

N is the normal force which is the same as the weight, so:

N = mg (4)

Let's calculate first the Normal force (4), then Fk (3) and finally the chance in the thermal energy (2):

N = 4.8 * 9.8 = 47.04 N

Fk = 0.28 * 47.04 = 13.1712 N

Finally the Thermal energy:

ΔEt = 13.1712 * 0.058

c) Block's speed reaching the spring

As the block is just reaching the speed, the initial Work is 0. And the following expression will help us to get the speed:

V = √2Ki/m   (5)

And Ki, which is the initial kinetic energy can be calculated with:

Ki = ΔU + ΔEt   (6)

And ΔU is the same value of work calculated in part (a) but instead of being negative, it will be positive here. So replacing the data first in (6) and then in (5), we can calculate the speed:

Ki = 0.7233 + 0.7639 = 1.4872 J

Finally the speed:

V = √(2 * 1.4872) / 4.8

Hope this helps

whichever one it is, it's definitely not one that you included on the list you provided.

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: