endoplasmic reticulum
If there is no radioactivity, it implies that no radioactive decay or nuclear processes are occurring. While this may be positive from a safety perspective, it also means that certain medical treatments, radiation therapy, and certain industrial processes that rely on radioactivity would not be possible. Additionally, our understanding of nuclear physics and certain natural phenomena would be limited.
According to the work of the Curies, which action would increase the radioactivity of polonium? Dissolve the polonium in a solvent.Heat the polonium until it becomes a gas.Expose the polonium sample to light.Increase the amount of polonium.
Gamma radioactivity would be the most dangerous because, unlike alpha particles that can be blocked by paper or skin, and beta particles which can be shielded by foil, gamma radioactivity would need a lead shield. Plus gamma radioactivity effects organic material.
Yes, you will find radioactivity as one of the end product of photosynthesis if the water containing radioactive oxygen is given to plants.
By age 30, Marie Curie had already made significant contributions to the field of radioactivity and had received her first Nobel Prize in Physics (1903). She would go on to win a second Nobel Prize in Chemistry (1911) for her discovery of radium and polonium. Curie continued to conduct groundbreaking research in radioactivity, becoming the first woman to win a Nobel Prize and the only person to win Nobel Prizes in two different scientific fields.
increase
balance
No, the horizontal component of a force is directly related to the magnitude of the force. Increasing the horizontal component of the force would require increasing the magnitude of the force itself.
Many. The questions first word "which" implies that a single component would be a correct answer but there are thousands of components and dozens of component types on a computer motherboard.
No, a nuclear explosion on a nuclear power plant would not cause the explosion radius to increase. The explosion radius would be determined by the yield of the nuclear weapon itself, not by the presence of the power plant.
Not a battery alone - no.
they felt it would increase trade with France .
The nucleus would contain the most radioactivity after DNA synthesis, as this is where DNA replication takes place. The newly synthesized DNA would thus be housed in the nucleus, making it the organelle most likely to be radioactively labeled.
The opposite would be non-radioactive. For elements, the opposite is stable.
If there is no radioactivity, it implies that no radioactive decay or nuclear processes are occurring. While this may be positive from a safety perspective, it also means that certain medical treatments, radiation therapy, and certain industrial processes that rely on radioactivity would not be possible. Additionally, our understanding of nuclear physics and certain natural phenomena would be limited.
A 5 to 1 ratio means that for every 5 parts of one component, there is 1 part of another component. In an 18 oz mixture, you can divide it into 6 parts (5 parts of one component and 1 part of the other). Therefore, you would have 15 oz of the first component and 3 oz of the second component.
Yes. And if massive enough then the density may increase due to gravitational attraction in a matter of time we can perceive. even with a small mass this is happening, however it may take 1000s to millions of years for it to be measurable.In most cases the mass would remain the same (absent radioactivity losses) but the density would increase. If highly radioactive its mass would likely decrease over time.