because of refraction
With potential energy, what matters is the difference in potential energy, not the energy in absolute terms. To simplify calculations, the gravitational potential at infinity is arbitrarily set to zero. This gives objects that are nearer than infinity (to any object that attracts them gravitationally), a negative potential energy.With potential energy, what matters is the difference in potential energy, not the energy in absolute terms. To simplify calculations, the gravitational potential at infinity is arbitrarily set to zero. This gives objects that are nearer than infinity (to any object that attracts them gravitationally), a negative potential energy.With potential energy, what matters is the difference in potential energy, not the energy in absolute terms. To simplify calculations, the gravitational potential at infinity is arbitrarily set to zero. This gives objects that are nearer than infinity (to any object that attracts them gravitationally), a negative potential energy.With potential energy, what matters is the difference in potential energy, not the energy in absolute terms. To simplify calculations, the gravitational potential at infinity is arbitrarily set to zero. This gives objects that are nearer than infinity (to any object that attracts them gravitationally), a negative potential energy.
The two whole numbers on either side of 9.06 are 9 (smaller than 9.06) and 10 (bigger than 9.06). Of the two, 9 is nearer and so that is the answer.
It is nearer to 10 because you would round up 5 to 10 to the nearest ten
No. 12.5 is nearer. But 12.5 is not the nearest because 12.05 is nearer. But again, 12.05 is not the nearest because 12.005 is nearer. Rational (and real) numbers are infinitely dense. That means that there are infinitely many numbers between any two numbers and so NO number is nearest to any other: it is always possible to find infinitely many numbers that are nearer.
100
Because they are.
Telescope
the shadow get bigger.
0.075 is bigger (nearer 1.0) than 0.05
the image will appear a bit bigger than the normal image
There is no such number. Given any number bigger than 258, it is always possible to find a number that is nearer to 258 and bigger than it. So that number would have a better claim to be next. But then it is possible to find another number that is nearer to 258 and bigger than that one and so the newest number has a better claim. And so on.
An algorithm used for painting 3D scenes to a 2D plane (like a computer screen or piece of paper).In brief, it sorts the elements of the scene by distance from the viewer, and paints the most remote objects first. Then nearer objects will be painted on top of more remote objects, and you don't need to calculate which parts of the remote scenery would be visible and which would be hidden behind nearer objects.The algorithm got the name because it is similar to how human painters (of pictures, not houses) paint the background first and nearer objects like people on top of the background.See related link.
It is due to the angle and position of the torchlight relative to the object casting the shadow. The nearer the torchlight is to the object, the bigger the shadow that the object casts.
the answer is 3.1 because it is nearer tothe next hole number
well... I'm not highly educated as I'm in 7Th class so with with my mind i think that it makes those two objects nearer and sometimes joined with each other. that's all what i know.
There can be no such number. On a number line there are infinitely many numbers between any two numbers. So if you think that x1 is the number after 3/4 you would be wrong because 0.5*(3/4 + x1) is bigger than 3/4 and is nearer than x1. If you call this number x2 then 0.5*(3/4 + x2) is bigger than 3/4 and is nearer still. And this sequence of x1, x2, x3, ... can go on forever with each number being bigger than 3/4 (and so after) but each one nearer to 3/4 than others before it.
the heaviest person would have to sit nearer the middle