ANSWER FAST PLEASE 20 POINTS! A student noticed that when he charged a balloon, it was attracted to the wall. He tried to put another charged balloon on the wall close to the other balloon, but it would not stick. What is the best explanation as to why this happened? (2 points) a The charged balloon that was already on the wall did not attract the balloon, and it fell. b There were too few remaining positive charges in the room to transfer to the second balloon. c When the second balloon was placed close to the first balloon, the charge of that balloon repelled it. d When the second balloon was placed on the wall, it took on the charge of the wall.

How the environment of the northeast region affects the lifestyle of the people that live there

How did southerners view andrew johnson and republicans in congress

Athief was passing by a house under construction when he noticed that the ladder being used by workers on the roof had copper braces supporting the rungs. after making sure that the workers on the roof could not see him, the thief used pliers that he had in his pocket to remove all of the copper braces that he could reach from the ground. a short time later, a worker climbed down the ladder and it collapsed. he fell to the ground and severely injured his back. the thief was apprehended a few hours later trying to sell the copper for scrap. a statute in the jurisdiction makes it a felony for "maliciously causing serious physical injury to another." the thief was charged with malicious injury under the statute and was also charged with larceny. after a jury trial in which the above facts were presented, he was convicted of both charges. if he appeals the conviction for the malicious injury charge on grounds of insufficient evidence, how should the court rule? a affirm the conviction, because the thief was engaged in criminal conduct at the time of the act that resulted in the injury. b affirm the conviction, because the jury could have found that the thief acted with malice. c reverse the conviction, because there was no evidence that the thief intended to injure anyone. d reverse the conviction, because there was no evidence that the thief bore any malice towards the workers on the roof.