Answered

Barton conducts an experiment using three metallic bars that might be magnets. The bars are labeled A, B, and C. The ends of each bar are numbered 1 or 2.

He places the end of one bar close to an end of a second bar and records his results in the table shown.
\begin{tabular}{|l|l|l|}
\hline \multicolumn{1}{|c|}{ End } & \multicolumn{1}{|c|}{ End } & \multicolumn{1}{|c|}{ Result } \\
\hline A1 & B1 & Attract \\
\hline A2 & C1 & Repel \\
\hline B2 & A1 & Attract \\
\hline
\end{tabular}

Based on the data, which prediction should he expect to occur?

A. A2 repels B1.
B. C2 attracts B2.
C. B1 repels C1.
D. A1 attracts C2.



Answer :

GinnyAnswer
To determine the predictions, let's analyze the given interactions step-by-step:

1. A1 attracts B1:
- Attraction between ends indicates opposite magnetic poles. Therefore, if A1 is the North pole, B1 must be the South pole, or vice versa.

2. A2 repels C1:
- Repulsion between ends indicates like poles. Therefore, if A2 is the North pole, C1 is also the North pole, or if A2 is the South pole, C1 is also the South pole.

3. B2 attracts A1:
- Again, attraction indicates opposite poles. Therefore, if A1 is the North pole, B2 must be the South pole, or if A1 is the South pole, B2 must be the North pole.

Let's summarize these observations:
- From "A1 attracts B1," we establish that A1 and B1 are opposite poles.
- From "A2 repels C1," we establish that A2 and C1 are like poles.
- From "B2 attracts A1," we again establish that A1 and B2 are opposite poles.

Given that A1 is attracting both B1 and B2, it suggests that B1 and B2 are the same pole, opposite to A1.

Now let's see if the predictions are consistent with these observations:

1. A2 repels B1:
- We know from A2 repelling C1 that A2 and C1 are like poles.
- Since B1 is opposite to A1 and A1 is attracting B1, B1 is opposite to A1.
- If A2 is like C1 and B1 is opposite A1, for A2 to repel B1, A2 has to be the same pole as B1.
- This prediction cannot be determined directly from the given information. It depends on the specific poles assigned, either both North or both South; however, we don't have enough precise data.

2. C2 attracts B2:
- We see that B2 is attracting A1, which makes B2 opposite to A1.
- If C2 attracts B2, C2 must be opposite to B2.
- Thus, this prediction is plausible.

3. B1 repels C1:
- From A2 repelling C1, A2 and C1 are like poles.
- From A1 attracting B1, A1 and B1 are opposite poles.
- Since C1 is the same as A2 (like poles) and B1 is opposite to A1, B1 being different from A1 should repel C1, which is the same as A2.
- This prediction is plausible.

4. A1 attracts C2:
- Given A1 attracts B1 and B2 attracts A1, and if C2 who possibly could be opposite to either A1 or B1 or B2, this isn't as directly inferable without inconsistency.
-This prediction is uncertain based on the ambiguity in repulsion context.

Thus, based on the direct analysis of interactions, the most consistent predictions with the given information are:

- C2 attracts B2
- B1 repels C1

So, C2 attracts B2 is most reliable expectations based on interactions linked.

Other Questions