Although theoretically a researcher conducting a phenomenological inquiry could establish hypotheses to predict the structure and features of phenomena being explored, this approach would not follow the "bracketing" method suggested by husserl. what are the advantages of either using hypotheses to predict phenomena or bracketing to explore such phenomena? are these two approaches mutually exclusive? if so, why?
the 'plum pudding' model of the atom was proposed by jj thomson, who had also discovered the electron. it was put forth before the discovery of the nucleus. according to this model, the atom is a sphere of positive charge, and negatively charged electrons are embedded in it to balance the total positive charge
the displacement of a body is the distance that exists between the starting point and the end point of the trajectory of an object.
it is represented by a vector and does not depend on the path made by the object, but on the final and initial point.
to calculate this vector 'd' we do the following procedure.
let and be the initial and final points of the trajectory of a body, so, the vector d is:
for the given problem we are told that the object starts the movement from the origin, which is the point (0,0) and ends at the point (0, -8)
then the vector is:
then the displacement has a magnitude of 8 meters
i would think klcio3