A student must use an object attached to a string to graphically determine the gravitational field strength near Earth's surface. The student attaches the free end of the string to the ceiling and pulls the object-string system so that the string makes an angle of 5 degrees from the object's vertical hanging position. The student then releases the object from rest and uses a stopwatch to measure the time it takes for the object to make one complete oscillation. Which of the following is the next step that will allow the student to determine the gravitational field strength? А) Repeat the experiment by adding additional mass to the object for multiple trials
B) Repeat the experiment by changing the length of the string for multiple trials
C) Repeat the experiment by changing the angle that the string makes with the object's vertical hanging position
D) Repeat the experiment by measuring the time it takes to make two oscillations, three oscillations, and additional oscillations for multiple trials

B) True. By changing the length get a different period and with a graph you can find the best value of the gravity pull

Explanation:

The student is reacting a simple pendulum experiment where he can determine the value of the relationship of gravity with the expression

              T = 2π

let's analyze each statement

A) False. The mass is not a paramer of the period expression

B) True. By changing the length get a different period and with a graph you can find the best value of the gravity pull

C) False. The angle while it is small does not influence the period

D) True. By changing the number of oscillations the period does not change, so you can get the value of the pull of gravity.

We can see that the expressions B and d are true, the most exact value is obtained using procedure B since the graphs allow to reduce the errors

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:

when heated, the valance electrons increased their speed and transferred the heat from electron to electron.   i just took the test.