Problem: I can use this background: Saturated hydrocarbons are given the general name of alkanes . The name of specific alkanes always ends in - ane . The first part of the name indicates how many carbon atoms each molecule of the alkane has. The smallest alkane is methane. It has just one carbon atom. The next largest is ethane, with two carbon atoms. The chemical formulas and properties of methane, ethane, and several other alkanes are listed in Table below . The boiling and melting points of alkanes are determined mainly by the number of carbon atoms they have. Alkanes with more carbon atoms generally have higher boiling and melting points.  Now, I have a new situation: Vic and Joe studied chemistry in school. Joe studied alkanes, while his friend Vic studied other acyclic hydrocarbons.  Answer this question please: Which friend studied less about ethane gas?

A: Joe


Problem: Given the question: I can use this background: When soil is flooded, hypoxia develops, as soil microorganisms consume oxygen faster than diffusion occurs. The presence of hypoxic soils is one of the defining characteristics of wetlands. Many wetland plants possess aerenchyma, and in some, such as water-lilies, there is mass flow of atmospheric air through leaves and rhizomes. There are many other chemical consequences of hypoxia. For example, nitrification is inhibited as low oxygen occurs and toxic compounds are formed, as anaerobic bacteria use nitrate, manganese, and sulfate as alternative electron acceptors. The reduction-oxidation potential of the rhizhosphere decreases and metal ions such as iron and manganese precipitate. Aerenchyma is a modification of the parenchyma.  Now, I have a new situation: John is a soil scientist. He has been studying the lands near Mississippi delta. He noticed cases of hypoxia in that are. He labeled that study as case A. To compare that to other areas he visited Arizona. There he didn't see any occurrence of hypoxia. He labeled that case as case B.  Answer this question please: Which case would less likely see formation of toxic compounds, case A or case B?
++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++
The answer is:
case B


input question: I can use this background: Many mutations have no effect on the proteins they encode. These mutations are considered neutral. Occasionally, a mutation may make a protein even better than it was before. Or the protein might help the organism adapt to a new environment. These mutations are considered beneficial. An example is a mutation that helps bacteria resist antibiotics. Bacteria with the mutation increase in numbers, so the mutation becomes more common. Other mutations are harmful. They may even be deadly. Harmful mutations often result in a protein that no longer can do its job. Some harmful mutations cause cancer or other genetic disorders.  Now, I have a new situation: David is a biochemist with a pharmaceutical company. He is testing three strains of bacteria, case A, case B, and case C. In case A the bacteria does not respond to antibiotics. In case B the bacteria resists antibiotics. Finally, in case C, the bacteria does not develop any immunity to antibiotics and eventually perishes.  Answer this question please: In which case the organism would less likely have genetic disorder, case B or case C????
output answer: case B


I can use this background: Regions on the Earth's surface (or in its atmosphere) that are high above mean sea level are referred to as high altitude. High altitude is sometimes defined to begin at 2,400 meters (8,000 ft) above sea level.[5][6][7]  At high altitude, atmospheric pressure is lower than that at sea level. This is due to two competing physical effects: gravity, which causes the air to be as close as possible to the ground; and the heat content of the air, which causes the molecules to bounce off each other and expand.[8]  Now, I have a new situation: There were two villages: Berg village situated at 3000 ft, at the base of the mountain, and Steep village, situated at 8500 feet. People visiting the area always stop in Berg village and feel great, but they feel bad and winded once they get to Steep village.  Answer this question please: Which village has a lower oxygen content in the air?
----
Answer: Steep


Q: I can use this background: During the 1670s, the Dutch tradesman Antony van Leeuwenhoek, shown in Figure below , used microscopes to observe many microbes and body cells. Leeuwenhoek developed an interest in microscopy and ground his own lenses to make simple microscopes. Leeuwenhoek was so good at making lenses that his simple microscopes were able to magnify much more clearly than the compound microscopes of his day. His microscope's increased ability to magnify over 200x is comparable to a modern compound light microscope. Compound microscopes , which are microscopes that use more than one lens, had been invented around 1595 by Zacharias Jansen, a Dutch spectacle-maker. Several people, including Robert Hooke, had built compound microscopes and were making important discoveries with them during Leeuwenhoek’s time.  Now, I have a new situation: John is interested in the history of science. He went to a science museum to learn more about microscopes. First he saw a Leeuwenhoek microscope, which was labeled as item A, then he saw a compound microscope of Leeuwenhoek's time, which was labeled as item B. At the very end of his museum tour he saw a modern compound light microscope, which was labeled as item C.  Answer this question please: Which microscope could magnify more clearly, item A or item B?
A: item A


[Q]: I can use this background: As a young man, Bohr worked in Rutherford’s lab in England. Because Rutherford’s model was weak on the position of the electrons, Bohr focused on them. He hypothesized that electrons can move around the nucleus only at fixed distances from the nucleus based on the amount of energy they have. He called these fixed distances energy levels, or electron shells. He thought of them as concentric spheres, with the nucleus at the center of each sphere. In other words, the shells consisted of sphere within sphere within sphere. Furthermore, electrons with less energy would be found at lower energy levels, closer to the nucleus. Those with more energy would be found at higher energy levels, farther from the nucleus. Bohr also hypothesized that if an electron absorbed just the right amount of energy, it would jump to the next higher energy level. Conversely, if it lost the same amount of energy, it would jump back to its original energy level. However, an electron could never exist in between two energy levels. These ideas are illustrated in the Figure below .  Now, I have a new situation: Greg was studying Bohr's model. He found it helpful to categorize different scenarios in the model. First, he labeled electron with higher energy as cat A, and electron with lower energy as cat B. Then he labeled electron that gained energy as cat C, and election that lost energy as cat D.  Answer this question please: Which electron would be closer to the nucleus, cat A or cat B?
****
[A]:
cat B