The total negative charge on the electrons in 1mol of helium (atomic number 2, molar mass 4) is

The total negative charge on the electrons in 1 mol of helium is 2e⁻

The negative charge in 1 mole of a substance (here; it is helium atom) is equal to 6.022  10²³ atoms and it is also equal to 96485 C/mol

In 1 mole of helium containing 2 atomic numbers and a molar mass of 4.

The total negative charge on the electrons for 1 mole of helium can be computed as:

= 192970 C

Recall that:

The negative charge in 1 mole of helium = 96485 C/mol

∴

Numbers of negative charge in 192970 C of helium is:

= (192970/ 96485)

= 2e⁻

Learn more about atomic numbers here:

link

Explanation:

We are given that

Atomic number=2

We have to find the total negative charge on the electrons in one mole of Helium.

We know that atomic number=Proton number

Proton number=Number of electrons=2

Number of electrons in Helium=2

1 mole of Helium= atoms

We know that q=ne

Where n =Number of fundamental units

e=Charge on electron

1 e=

Using the formula

Total negative charge in 1 mole=

Hence, the total negative charge on the electrons in 1 mole of Helium=

relativism, roughly put, is the view that truth and falsity, right and wrong, standards of reasoning, and procedures of justification are products of differing conventions and frameworks of assessment and that their authority is confined to the context giving rise to them. more precisely, “relativism” covers views which maintain that—at a high level of abstraction—at least some class of things have the properties they have (e.g., beautiful, morally good, epistemically justified) not simpliciter, but only relative to a given framework of assessment (e.g., local cultural norms, individual standards), and correspondingly, that the truth of claims attributing these properties holds only once the relevant framework of assessment is specified or supplied. relativists characteristically insist, furthermore, that if something is only relatively so, then there can be no framework-independent vantage point from which the matter of whether the thing in question is so can be established.

relativism has been, in its various guises, both one of the most popular and most reviled philosophical doctrines of our time. defenders see it as a harbinger of tolerance and the only ethical and epistemic stance worthy of the open-minded and tolerant. detractors dismiss it for its alleged incoherence and uncritical intellectual permissiveness. debates about relativism permeate the whole spectrum of philosophical sub-disciplines. from ethics to epistemology, science to religion, political theory to ontology, theories of meaning and even logic, philosophy has felt the need to respond to this heady and seemingly subversive idea. discussions of relativism often also invoke considerations relevant to the very nature and methodology of philosophy and to the division between the so-called “analytic and continental” camps in philosophy. and yet, despite a long history of debate going back to plato and an increasingly large body of writing, it is still difficult to come to an agreed definition of what, at its core, relativism is, and what philosophical import it has. this entry attempts to provide a broad account of the many ways in which “relativism” has been defined, explained, defended and criticized.

explanation:

the duration of a photographic flash is related to an rc time constant, which is 0.100 μs for a certain camera.