ged science and practice test

A a high school equivalency exam designed for individuals who did not graduate from high school but want to demonstrate they have the same knowledge and skills as a high school graduate

In 1908, a huge explosion known as the Tunguska Event flattened trees for miles across a remote area of Russia. Scientists now think an asteroid or a comet entered Earth's atmosphere, causing the explosion. Ice core samples from an ice sheet in Greenland reveal signs of this enormous explosion: deposits of ammonia equal to 5 micrograms per square meter. But how exactly did these telltale molecules form? • Hypothesis 1: The Tunguska explosion started forest fires, known to produce ammonia. Data indicates that such fires would have deposited an amount of ammonia over the Northern Hemisphere equaling 0.1 micrograms per square meter. • Hypothesis 2: Up to 1% of the object's mass might have been ammonia, and this ammonia might have spread over the Northern Hemisphere. Approximately 0.00005 micrograms of ammonia per square meter are predicted by this hypothesis. • Hypothesis 3: Since many compounds form in the presence of high heat, the ammonia could have been produced as the falling object heated the atmosphere. However, heat alone is not sufficient to cause the formation of ammonia. • Hypothesis 4: As it passed through the atmosphere, the object pushed air in front of it at high pressure. Nitrogen and hydrogen combine to form ammonia under similar pressure. Considering the amount of hydrogen expected in a comet and the available nitrogen in Earth's atmosphere, approximately 5 micrograms of ammonia per square meter would have been deposited under this hypothesis.
Scientists have estimated the mass of the object that caused the Tunguska Event at 5 x 10^12 kilograms (kg). If the object was a comet in which 1% of total mass was ammonia, how much ammonia did the comet contain? kg
Correct Answer & Rationale
Correct Answer: 5x10^10

To find the mass of ammonia in the comet, we calculate 1% of the total mass (5 x 10^12 kg). This is done by multiplying the total mass by 0.01: 5 x 10^12 kg × 0.01 = 5 x 10^10 kg. This calculation confirms that the comet contained 5 x 10^10 kg of ammonia. Other options may result from incorrect calculations, such as misunderstanding the percentage or misapplying the multiplication. For instance, using 0.1 instead of 0.01 would yield an answer ten times larger, while failing to convert the percentage to a decimal would also lead to an incorrect figure.

Other Related Questions

Based on these results and assuming that whenever two materials are present their remaining energy is averaged, what would the scientist best conclude to be the composition of Saturn's rings?
Question image
  • A. equal amounts of loose rocks and loose snow
  • B. equal amounts of ice and bedrock
  • C. a small amount of bedrock and a large amount of carbon rock
  • D. large amounts of ice and smaller amounts of carbon rock
Correct Answer & Rationale
Correct Answer: D

The conclusion about Saturn's rings is supported by the composition of ice and carbon rock. Large amounts of ice are consistent with observations of Saturn’s rings, which are primarily composed of water ice particles. Smaller amounts of carbon rock align with the presence of darker materials found in the rings. Options A and B suggest equal amounts of materials that do not reflect the observed predominance of ice. Option C overestimates the presence of bedrock, which is not supported by scientific data. Thus, option D accurately captures the dominant composition of Saturn's rings.
best explains the ammonia deposits found in ice core samples from the time of the Tunguska Event. The evidence that best supports the validity of this hypothesis is the-
  • A. Hypothesis 2
  • B. heat produced by fast-moving objects in the atmosphere
  • C. Hypothesis 1
  • D. match between measured and predicted amounts of ammonia
Correct Answer & Rationale
Correct Answer: A,D

The ammonia deposits found in ice core samples from the time of the Tunguska Event suggest a significant environmental impact. Hypothesis 2 (Option A) likely proposes a link between the event and the ammonia presence, making it relevant for explaining the deposits. Option B, which discusses heat from fast-moving objects, does not directly address ammonia production or accumulation. Hypothesis 1 (Option C) may not provide sufficient evidence or detail to support the ammonia findings. Option D highlights the alignment between measured and predicted ammonia levels, reinforcing the validity of Hypothesis 2 as it connects empirical data with theoretical expectations.
If these results correctly predict the performance of this kneepad design, what is the probability that one of the kneepads will require a force of 145 N or greater to cause failure?
Question image
  • A. 53%
  • B. 22%
  • C. 75%
  • D. 25%
Correct Answer & Rationale
Correct Answer: D

To determine the probability of a kneepad requiring a force of 145 N or greater to cause failure, we analyze the data provided. The correct option, 25%, indicates that one-fourth of the kneepads are expected to fail under this force, aligning with statistical predictions for this design. Option A (53%) overestimates the likelihood, suggesting more than half will fail, which is not supported by the data. Option B (22%) underestimates the probability, indicating fewer kneepads will fail than expected. Option C (75%) is excessively high, implying a significant majority would fail, which contradicts the predicted performance. Thus, 25% accurately reflects the failure rate at this force threshold.
Which instruction would be most appropriate for step 2 of the procedure?
Question image
  • A. Provide both group A and group B participants with a daily magnesium supplement.
  • B. Provide group A participants with a daily magnesium supplement and provide group B participants with a daily supplement that contains only inactive ingredients.
  • C. Provide group A participants with a high-magnesium supplement and group B participants with a low-magnesium supplement...
  • D. Provide both group A and group B participants with guidelines about which foods they should consume.
Correct Answer & Rationale
Correct Answer: B

Option B is the most appropriate instruction for step 2 as it establishes a clear experimental control. By giving group A a magnesium supplement and group B an inactive placebo, it allows for a direct comparison of the effects of magnesium on the participants. Option A is incorrect because it does not create a control group; both groups would receive magnesium, making it impossible to determine its specific effects. Option C is flawed as it introduces an additional variable by varying the magnesium levels between groups, complicating the results. Option D fails to provide a direct intervention, which is essential for assessing the impact of magnesium supplementation.