Want this question answered?
There is no simple relationship. However, the general tendency is that rougher surfaces have a greater coefficient of friction.
they are directly proportional, the greater the mass, the greater the sliding friction
Yes. That is what is meant by directly proportional.
The relationship between the radius and surface area depends on the shape and that is why some cells are spherical while others are flattened. The greater the SAV ratio of an object, the greater the scope for surface reactions of the object with its surroundings.
No. "Negative correlation" means no relationship can be found between the two quantities. But in the case of the gravitational force, there is a definite, bullet-proof, mathematical connection between the distance and the force. Since a greater distance leads to a smaller force, the relationship is said to be "inverse", but the correlation is definitely not "negative".
As a general rule the longer the carbon chain the greater the Rf value.
There is no simple relationship. However, the general tendency is that rougher surfaces have a greater coefficient of friction.
The greater the depth, the greater the pressure.
A star's lifetime is dependent on central temperatures and densities, and more massive stars with greater central temperatures and densities, exhaust their nuclear fuel more rapidly.
Here is a quote: "The relationship between adaptation and natural selection does not go both ways. Whereas greater relative adaptation leads to natural selection, natural selection does not necessarily lead to greater adaptation." I do not recall who said it, but this is what the relationship between both is. Here is a quote: "The relationship between adaptation and natural selection does not go both ways. Whereas greater relative adaptation leads to natural selection, natural selection does not necessarily lead to greater adaptation." I do not recall who said it, but this is what the relationship between both is. Here is a quote: "The relationship between adaptation and natural selection does not go both ways. Whereas greater relative adaptation leads to natural selection, natural selection does not necessarily lead to greater adaptation." I do not recall who said it, but this is what the relationship between both is.
When it comes to investing, one general relationship between risk and reward is that taking more risk is associated with a greater return. However, in many cases there is no relationship between the two. For example, even though stocks tend to have a higher return than bonds, taking that risk does not guarantee a better return.
they are directly proportional, the greater the mass, the greater the sliding friction
The greater the mass the stronger the gravitational pull
l is greater than n
The relationship between just the sides is that the sum of any two of them must be greater than the third. Any other relationship involves one (or more) angles.
Yes. It stands for mean time between failure so the greater the MTBF, greater will be the longevity or lifetime of the equipment between two successive failures
hemoglobin is the core of RBC'S and it has greater affinity to oxygen