Star 3 is 138 light years away from Star 1 and 75 light years away from Star 2. Which of these conclusions about the stars is correct?
The light from Star 2 reaches Star 1 in 63 years.
Star 2 is 63 kilometers away from Star 3.
Star 2 is 213 miles away from Star 3.
The light from Star 2 reaches Star 1 in 213 years.
Stacey Warren - Expert brainly.com
Hey! We 've verified this expert answer for you, click below to unlock the details :)
At vero eos et accusamus et iusto odio dignissimos ducimus qui blanditiis praesentium voluptatum deleniti atque corrupti quos dolores et quas molestias excepturi sint occaecati cupiditate non provident, similique sunt in culpa qui officia deserunt mollitia animi, id est laborum et dolorum fuga.
Et harum quidem rerum facilis est et expedita distinctio. Nam libero tempore, cum soluta nobis est eligendi optio cumque nihil impedit quo minus id quod maxime placeat facere possimus, omnis voluptas assumenda est, omnis dolor repellendus.
Itaque earum rerum hic tenetur a sapiente delectus, ut aut reiciendis voluptatibus maiores alias consequatur aut perferendis doloribus asperiores repellat.
I got my questions answered at brainly.com in under 10 minutes. Go to brainly.com now for free help!
If the second one is suppose to be light years vs kilometers I would pick that one because you don't know in which direction star 1 or star 2 is in reference to star 3. And it wouldnt make sense to have kilometers in astronomical terms as that would be infitesmly small in those terms
Not the answer you are looking for? Search for more explanations.
None of the conclusions are correct.
1) Requires the assumption that Star two is collinear with Star one and three and between them.
2) We do not know position of the stars relative to each other, so we cannot claim this. Also, kilometres are far too small for working on a cosmic scale
3) Miles are also far too small; again we do not know the relative positions of the stars.
4) Requires assumption that Star 2 is collinear with Star 1 and Star 3, is at the far end from 1.
So, we can see that none of the conclusions logically follow from the available data.
Honestly, I would say none of the conclusions are correct, since no information is given about their relative positions to one another. If you assume they are all in a straight line, then only first inference could be made, but I wouldn't call it a conclusion.