0
Want this question answered?
Be notified when an answer is posted
Add your answer:
Earn +20 pts
What piece of evidence convinced scientists that some meteorites could have come from the moon?
rocks
What evidence in 1956 that supports the big bang theory?
1) The existence, isotropy, and spectrum of the Cosmic Microwave Background Radiation. It was predicted sixteeen years before it was detected, and has been found to be exactly as proponents of Big Bang Cosmology (BBC) say it should be. All other hypotheses are reduced to saying, "I know the CMBR is there, I just have no explanation for it." 2) The red-shift of all distant galaxies, with the size of the red shift being proportional to the galaxies' distance from us. All observations of this red shift support a Universe that was far denser about 13.7 billion years ago. 3) The ratio of hydrogen and helium in our Universe is exactly as predicted by BBC. 4) Quasars are distant from us (ie, far in our past), but none are close. 5) The ratio of isotopes with long half-lives to their decay products show none of the former existed prior to about 12 billion years ago. 6) No white dwarf stars -- which will remain stable for tens of trillions of years -- have been found older than about ten billion years. The evidence for BBC is as strong as the evidence that our Earth goes around our Sun.
What piece of evidence suggests that the Martian moons did not form with Mars?
The origin of Mars' moons is fairly controversial, and it's far from settled exactly where they came from.
Does life exists on Mars?
This question is remains unanswered. There is evidence of frozen water, small oxygen levels and some prehistoric fossils. This piece of evidence concludes that there was life on Mars. Obviously scientists will need more evidence before they are able to decide on if Mars has life.
Evidence that the universe is expanding is best provided by the?
The main piece of evidence is the redshift of galaxies. In spectroscopy an absorption line that is redshifted indicates that the object is moving away. The farther the object is from the source of observance the faster that object travels in relation to the observer. Almost all galaxies are redshifted as opposed the our local neighborhood, the Andromeda Galaxy for instance is blueshifted because it is heading strait for us. at some point all galaxies will spread so far from each other that they will be going so fast that they reach the speed of light in respect to our position and are never seen again. Another piece of evidence is the fact that their is some warmth in space. Also known as the Cosmic background radiation. Empty Space is around 2.7 degrees kelvin which is the residual heat from the big bang. Had their not have been an explosion with a massive amount of heat and energy and everything simply was, then empty space would be absolute zero. This is the two strongest arguments that support the big bang theory.
Who was the Hubble named after and why?
It was named after Edwin P. Hubble (1889 - 1953) for his pioneering work in astrophysics. The Hubble constant is the basis for the determination of the size of the universe and an essential piece of the foundations of the Big Bang theory.
What word means a piece of evidence that helps solve a problem?
evidence
What is a piece of evidence?
Never mind
How do scientists know that universe is expanding?
There are several pieces of evidence. One important piece of evidence is the redshift of distant galaxies. That is, the change in the color of the light that reaches us indicates that far-away galaxies are receding (going away) from us.Answer2.The redshift itself is misunderstood and is weak evidence for an expanding universe. Hubble is the authority on the redshift data and Hubble does not support the redshift interpretation of an expanding universe. The universe is not expanding it is in scalar equilibrium and the redshift is evidence of this equilibrium. At the speed of light the universe is also in vector equilibrium, F= ma= 0.See Alan Sandage on Hubble reference in related links..Hubble believed that his count data gave a more reasonable result concerning spatial curvature if the redshift correction was made assuming no recession. To the very end of his writings he maintained this position, favouring (or at the very least keeping open) the model where no true expansionexists, and therefore that the redshift "represents a hitherto unrecognized principle of nature". This viewpoint is emphasized (a) in The Realm of the Nebulae, (b)in his reply (Hubble 1937a) to the criticisms of the 1936 papers by Eddington and by McVittie, and (c)in his 1937 Rhodes Lectures published as The Observational Approach to Cosmology(Hubble 1937b). It also persists in his last published scientific paper which is an account of his Darwin Lecture (Hubble 1953).
What is the difference in primary and secondary evidence?
the difference is that Primary evidence is took from that moment and secondary is a piece of evidence found from the past.
What is any piece of data that can support an assertion?
evidence
A piece of evidence that helps solve a problem?
A clue.
When does a piece of information become a fact?
When it is used for evidence
What transforms a piece of information into evidence?
kurko bangz
What is a trial exhibit?
It is a piece of physical evidence presented at trial.
Can you give me an example sentence with the word piece?
The last piece of the jigsaw is missing.The detectives began to piece the evidence together.
Which of the following is not a piece of evidence supporting the idea that Europa may have a subsurface ocean?
NOT A PIECE OF EVIDENCE (as the question asked for ): Astronomers have detected small lakes of liquid water on Europa's surface.
