I have a new situation: Joel has just started his first day working as a scientist in a laboratory. The first task he was given is to look at two atoms and to jot down as much information about the two as he can. First, he needs to come up with an identification for these atoms. Since he is new, he decides to keep it professional and simply call the larger of the two atoms "atom L" and the smaller one "atom S". Now that he's taken care of that he can get down to work.  But I can use this background: The ionization energies of the representative elements generally decrease from top to bottom within a group. This trend is explained by the increase in size of the atoms within a group. The valence electron that is being removed is further from the nucleus in the case of a larger atom. The attractive force between the valence electron and the nucleus weakens as the distance between them increases and as the shielding effect increases, resulting in a lower ionization energy for the larger atoms within a group. Although the nuclear charge is increased for larger atoms, the shielding effect also increases due to the presence of a larger number of inner electrons. This is particularly easy to see in the alkali metals, where the single valence electron is shielded by all of the inner core electrons.  What is an answer for this question: Which cell has less inner electrons?
Ans: atom S

I have a new situation: Rob is a biologist who is interested in native species conservation. To that end, he conducted two studies, case A and case B. In case A, a non native apex predator C was introduced in formerly apex predator D's habitat. In case B, same non native apex predator C was removed from formerly apex predator D's habitat. He now needs to analyze the results of these studies.  But I can use this background: Apex predators affect prey species' population dynamics and populations of other predators, both in aquatic and in terrestrial ecosystems. Non-native predatory fish, for instance, have sometimes devastated formerly dominant predators. A lake manipulation study found that when the non-native smallmouth bass was removed, lake trout, the suppressed native apex predator, diversified its prey selection and increased its trophic level. As a terrestrial example, the badger, an apex predator, predates on and also competes with the hedgehog, a mesopredator, for food such as insects, small mammals, reptiles, amphibians and ground-nesting bird's eggs. Removal of badgers (in a trial investigating bovine tuberculosis) caused hedgehog densities to more than double. Predators that exert a top-down control on organisms in their community are often considered keystone species. Humans are not considered apex predators because their diets are typically diverse, although human trophic levels increase with consumption of meat.  What is an answer for this question: Would predator D's trophic level increase or decrease in case A than in case B?
Ans: decrease

I have a new situation: Two farmers had neighboring parcels of land. Bob had a nice parcel of old growth forest, while the other farmer, named Bill , had a similar sized parcel covered in grasslands.  But I can use this background: Precipitation in grasslands is equal to or less than evapotranspiration and causes soil development to operate in relative drought. Leaching and migration of weathering products is therefore decreased. Large amounts of evaporation causes buildup of calcium (Ca) and other large cations flocculate clay minerals and fulvic acids in the upper soil profile. Impermeable clay limits downward percolation of water and fulvic acids, reducing chemical weathering and podzolization. The depth to the maximum concentration of clay increases in areas of increased precipitation and leaching. When leaching is decreased, the Ca precipitates as calcite (CaCO3) in the lower soil levels, a layer known as caliche.  What is an answer for this question: Which farmer observed increased leaching of weathering products in the soil?
Ans: Bob

I have a new situation: Stef is a young girl interested in the geography of the world. For her birthday, she got two different representations of the Earth. Her grandparents gave her a map that uses the Mercator projection and her uncle gave her a globe. She is comparing how certain countries look differently on the two gifts and trying to figure out why that is. She is specifically looking at Norway, a country near the North Pole, and Mexico, a country close to the equator.  But I can use this background: The Mercator projection is best within 15 degrees north or south of the equator. Landmasses or countries outside that zone get stretched out of shape. The further the feature is from the equator, the more out of shape it is stretched. For example, if you look at Greenland on a globe, you see it is a relatively small country near the North Pole. Yet, on a Mercator projection, Greenland looks almost as big the United States. Because Greenland is closer to the pole, the continent's shape and size are greatly increased. The United States is closer to its true dimensions.  What is an answer for this question: Which country will be less misshapen on the map?

Ans: Mexico