0
If you could magnify a droplet of water hundreds of thousands of times what might you see?
Wiki User
∙ 14y ago
If the water was not absolutely pure and sterile, you'd see organisms living in it - enough magnification and you could examine their cell structure and identify the DNA, etc. Also whatever impurities were in the water - bits of organic waste matter, undissolved minerals, precipitates. Though you wouldn't be able to see the water molecules themselves without a VERY powerful microscope.
Wiki User
∙ 14y ago
Add your answer:
Earn +20 pts
Why countries that do not produce acid rain still can suffter from it?
Because the gasses that eventually cause acid rain are everywhere in the atmosphere and clouds. As wind patterns move over the earth, they carry these gasses everywhere they go. The rain falls where it will. The acid rain gasses could come from hundreds or thousands of miles away.
Why do you need a special microscope to see atoms?
Because traditional optics cannot magnify something the size of an angstrom to a level viewable by the human eye. In addition atoms move faster than a human could track.
What kind of fossil is a arrowhead made thousands of year ago?
Arrowheads are not fossils, they were made by the Native Americans to use on the tips of their arrows.
How long does it take for a CD to decompose?
It could be many hundreds of years for a cd to decompose. Unless they are in a corrosive acidic enviroment. Usable "life" is 217 years for re-writables... Permanents are much longer. Do no throw them in the trash, you can send them in to be recycled. Gather a bunch and send them in. http://www.cdrecyclingcenter.org/
True of False As a result of hundreds of thousands of years of natural selection modern humans are now perfectly adapted to their environment?
False. Organisms are never ' perfectly adapted to the environment, as evolution is blind and can not predict the future, or create anew. All is ' tinkered ' together in the organism on top of adaptions that were from past environments. Natural selection adapts as best it can to the immediate environment and carries vestigial traits and poor engineering solutions on to future generations. ( appendix and the hole in the retina for two examples of this ) While man can shape his environment only a benighted social scientists could think we, as living organisms. are beyond natural selection and evolution, or that we have been perfectly adapted to the present environment.
Is this correct- millions of thousands?
No. You could say Hundreds of thousands. The first # must be smaller than the second #.
How do you make a sentence using magnify?
I really could use something to magnify this print.
Why forests should be saved from clearance and destruction?
Because the trees are homes to hundreds of thousands of animals, a tree that could make a floor board for a human could make hundreds of homes for animals
How much does a 1958 Plymouth fury go for?
It depends on the condition. It could be hundreds or many thousands of dollars.
What is the value of 1979 dodge transvan?
The condition will make all the difference. Could be hundreds or thousands of dollars.
How much the first microscope magnify?
The first microscope could magnify Less Than 20X
What is a sentence for the word magnify?
When you use a microscope it will magnify the object you are looking at.Unwanted publicity can magnify the effect of a small political indiscretion.
Which is correct - 'Hundreds of thousands of people' or 'hundreds and thousands of people'?
Hundreds of thousands of people! Answer hundreds and thousands of people Answer As you can see, both alternatives are used, and probably they are equally correct. I would tend to use "of". You may have heard people say "tens of thousands", and this is correct usage as well. The idea is that "tens" and "hundreds" are ways to give a rough idea of scale. I could say "There are thousands of people in New York City." "Thousands" is not entirely wrong; there are in fact many, many thousands of people there (a thousand thousands for each million). But thousands isn't the best estimate of magnitude. If I say "thousands", I mean a few thousand, maybe even a few more than 10. But if I say "tens of thousands", I mean, perhaps, 30, 40, 50, 60 thousand. Thousands, around the order of magnitude "10". Hundreds and thousands, to my ear, does not convey the same general magnitude of size. Of course, there is nothing even remotely accurate about these estimates, but they help us grasp what the speaker is attempting to convey. Hundreds and thousands means multiples of hundreds (100s) and/or thousands (1000s). But hundreds of thousands (100000s) means multiples of a much bigger number indeed. So both are correct expressions but they convey the idea of quite different sizes of number.
The number of your hundreds plus the number of your thousands is 3 the number of your tens is 7 ties the number of your hundreds the number of your ones is 3 the number of your thousands what naumber?
Could you please complete the words in your question? I am unable to solve a partial question.
How long could a long period comets take to orbit around the Sun?
Possibly hundreds of thousands of years.
If you say hundreds and also thousands what do you say when it comes to a number below 100?
You could say "dozens" for some number between 12 and maybe 48. You could try "scores" for numbers like 10,20,30... And while 'hundreds' or 'thousands' would be menat to imply some large number that you aren't sure of - IE "there are thousands of them" - you might say "there are like 56 of them"
Can tou live in equator?
Personally, I could not. But there are hundreds of thousands of people all around the world, in the countries crossed by the equator, who do.
