Yahoo Answers is shutting down on May 4th, 2021 (Eastern Time) and beginning April 20th, 2021 (Eastern Time) the Yahoo Answers website will be in read-only mode. There will be no changes to other Yahoo properties or services, or your Yahoo account. You can find more information about the Yahoo Answers shutdown and how to download your data on this help page.
Arvtard64
In elements such as Iron, why do electrons 'skip' shells?
I know that the third shell of Iron can hold a total of 18 electrons, so why do 2 of them skip to the next shell, with the third shell only having 14 electrons?
2 AnswersChemistry9 years agoMarco!______________________________________?
3 AnswersPhilosophy10 years agoWhat happens when a country 'buys' another country?
So I'm guessing the President of the buying country becomes president of the bought country, and all of the bought country's income, military and resources are given?
EXTENSION: If possible, what happens when a COMPANY buys a country?
5 AnswersEconomics10 years agoIs it possible to pee during 'intercourse'?
If so, how would your partner feel? O.O
6 AnswersTrying to Conceive10 years agoIf you squeeze your nuts too hard will they explode?
I've always wondered...
6 AnswersMen's Health10 years agoConfusing concept to wrap your mind around, anyone can help?
If you want to measure the length of an object, that's of random length, the chances that it'll be to a whole centimetre if you measure in millimetres are 1/10. To the nearest micrometre, that would become 1/10,000, and so forth. To cut it short, you could keep minimizing the unit of length you measure it to, and so the chances it'll be to a whole centimetre is 1/infinite. Numerically this is correct even though there are flaws with this.
Now, if you want to measure it to the nearest metre, then the chances will also be 1/infinite using the same concept as before. But we know that the chances it'll be to the nearest metre will be 100 times less then the chances of it being to the nearest centimetre. So the chances will be 1/infinite*100. But we simply can't multiply infinite by anything, it's impossible. Infinite*100 is, basically speaking, still infinite.
So the chances of both are 1/infinite, but we know the second one is 100 times less than the first one, yet we cannot show this because both are infinite. We know one is less than the other, but they're both the same. Can anyone come up with a system of chance which lets us diffrientiate this when the denominator of the chance fraction is infinite?
2 AnswersMathematics10 years agoHow do you mark a question as Open for Voting on Yahoo Answers?
Seriously...How?
3 AnswersYahoo Answers1 decade agoWhat is the best Halo 3 weapon?
Everyone asks this. Everyone has their own opinion. But there HAS to be some answer to this question.
10 AnswersVideo & Online Games1 decade ago