Tutor profile: Carlo S.
Why does an induced charge become neutral over time?
Charge is the absence or presence of electrons. Lesser electrons mean a net positive charge and more electrons mean a net negative charge. If you were to rub an object against another, electrons would actually transfer from one object to the other, creating what is known as an induced charge. One object would have an induced positive charge and the other would have an induced negative charge. But over time, these objects become neutral again. If you were to rub a balloon against a piece of cloth and the closer you bought the balloon to your hair, your hair would stand up. But, you cannot do that forever. This is because the induced charges "leak" into the water molecules in the air. The structure of water is what is known in chemistry as "polar", because the charge of the molecule itself is not distributed symmetrically. Oxygen is negative and hydrogen is positive, so oxygen will have most of the negative charge and hydrogen will have most of the positive charge. The excess electrons on one object will bond to the hydrogen atom in the air and the object lacking the electrons will gain electrons from the air as well.
Is the phrase "more better" correct or incorrect in the following phrases? For example, "My car is more better than yours" or "We need more better people".
There are incorrect and correct, respectively. When you compare two things you usually add an -er to the end of an adjective that is describing the distinction between those things, such as "farther" or "bigger". But when you are saying something is superior or favorable to another thing, you would say "better" not "gooder". Or if something exceeds something else, let's say in price, you would say, "more expensive". But combining "more" and "better" is incorrect SOMETIMES, but the context is very important. For example, "An A+ is better than a C-" is correct, whereas "An A+ is more better than a C- is not". That is because "better" is already describing something as superior to another thing and adding "more" before it makes "better" seem redundant. Using "more" before "better" may seem as if you are adding emphasis but you are actually doing the opposite. If you want to add emphasize that distinction, you would say "even better" instead of "more better". However, that is not say that you cannot fully say "more" before "better". In the example asked above, "We need more better people" is correct because "more" is not being using to emphasize the distinction between two things. Instead it's being used to quantify the need for "better people".
What is the total cooking time of a chicken that weighs "w" pounds and needs to be cooked for 20 minutes per pound, plus an additional 15 minutes?
There is a linear relationship between total cooking time and the weight of the chicken. Firstly, the weight of the chicken "w" is the variable in this question because we do not know what it is. But the problem did tell us that it needs to be cooked for 20 minutes PER POUND, plus an additional 15 minutes. If we must cook the chicken 20 minutes for every pound it weighs, then that means we must multiply these two terms together to get: 20w. Then, because we must also add 15 minutes our expression becomes: 20w + 15. Finally, because this is linear relationship, meaning that if we were to graph this equation it would be a straight line, the final expression becomes: y = 20w + 15.
needs and Carlo will reply soon.