Question 1

The basic working principle of a modern household washing machine is based mainly on which of the following physical processes?

Accepted Answer

Introduction / Context: A washing machine is a common household appliance, and understanding its working principle is a basic application of physics in everyday life. This question tests whether you can connect the operation of a washing machine, especially during the spinning and drying phase, to the correct scientific process. Recognising that centrifugation is involved helps bridge school physics with practical devices used at home. Given Data / Assumptions: The options are reverse osmosis, diffusion, centrifugation and dialysis. We focus on the core mechanical principle used to remove water from clothes during the spin cycle. We assume a standard electric washing machine with a rotating drum. Concept / Approach: Centrifugation is the process of separating components of a mixture by spinning it at high speed so that heavier components move outward due to the outward-acting effect of rotation. In a washing machine, when the drum spins rapidly during the spin cycle, water is forced out through the holes in the drum while clothes are pressed against the walls. Reverse osmosis and dialysis relate to separation using semipermeable membranes, and diffusion is the random movement of particles, none of which describe the main spin-drying action. Step-by-Step Solution: Step 1: Visualise the washing machine during the spin cycle: the drum rotates at very high speed, and clothes move outward to the walls. Step 2: Recognise that as the drum spins, water in the clothes is pushed outwards through perforations in the drum, reducing moisture content. Step 3: Understand that this is an application of the centrifugation principle, where rotational motion helps separate liquid from solid clothing. Step 4: Compare this with reverse osmosis, diffusion and dialysis, which involve molecular movement across membranes, not spinning solids and liquids. Step 5: Conclude that centrifugation is the most accurate description of the washing machine's key working principle. Verification / Alternative check: Physics and engineering descriptions of washing machines specifically mention centrifugal force (more precisely, the inertial effect in a rotating frame) as the main mechanism for water removal. The spinning drum acts as a simple centrifuge, similar to laboratory centrifuges used to separate liquids and solids. Reverse osmosis is used in water purifiers, diffusion is a general molecular process, and dialysis is a medical separation technique. None of these match the mechanical spinning action that characterises washing machines. Why Other Options Are Wrong: Reverse osmosis: This process forces water through a semipermeable membrane to remove impurities and is used in water purifiers, not in washing machines. Diffusion: A slow process involving random molecular motion that does not explain the rapid removal of water from spinning clothes. Dialysis: A medical or chemical separation process using semipermeable membranes, again unrelated to the spinning action of a washing machine. Common Pitfalls: Some learners see “osmosis” or “diffusion” and think of water movement, leading them to choose those options, but they forget that washing machines rely on mechanical rotation rather than molecular membrane transport. Another pitfall is misunderstanding the term “centrifugal force” as something only used in laboratories, whereas it is actually applied in many practical devices, including washing machines. Focusing on the high-speed spinning of the drum makes it clear that centrifugation is the correct principle. Final Answer: Thus, the working principle of a washing machine is mainly based on centrifugation.

Question 2

In basic optics, the speed of light is minimum when it passes through which one of the following media?

Accepted Answer

Introduction / Context: The speed of light is a fundamental concept in physics and basic science examinations. In a vacuum, light travels at its maximum speed, but in different media such as air, water, or glass, its speed changes because of the optical density of the medium. This question tests your understanding of how the speed of light varies with different transparent materials and the idea of refractive index and optical density. Given Data / Assumptions: We are comparing the speed of light in four media: vacuum, air, water, and glass. The refractive index of each medium is different. There are no special experimental conditions; standard conditions are assumed. Light is passing normally through each medium. Concept / Approach: The key concept is the relation between speed of light and refractive index. The refractive index n of a medium is defined as n = c / v, where c is the speed of light in vacuum and v is the speed of light in the medium. A higher refractive index means light travels more slowly in that medium. Vacuum has refractive index 1, air has a value slightly greater than 1, water has a larger refractive index than air, and glass usually has a refractive index higher than that of water. Therefore, the speed of light is slowest in the medium with the highest refractive index. Step-by-Step Solution: Step 1: Recall that in vacuum, light has its maximum speed and refractive index is minimum (approximately 1). Step 2: Air is only slightly denser optically than vacuum, so the speed of light in air is almost the same as in vacuum but still slightly lower. Step 3: Water is denser than air and has a higher refractive index, so light travels more slowly in water than in air. Step 4: Glass is typically more optically dense than water and has a higher refractive index than water. Step 5: Since speed v = c / n, the highest value of n gives the smallest value of v. Among the given options, glass has the highest refractive index. Step 6: Therefore, the speed of light is minimum while passing through glass. Verification / Alternative check: Another way to remember this is the common ordering used in school physics: speed of light is greatest in vacuum, slightly less in air, less again in water, and least in denser transparent solids like glass and some crystals. Textbooks and exam tables usually show refractive index values around n(air) ≈ 1.0003, n(water) ≈ 1.33 and n(glass) ≈ 1.5 (values vary slightly with type of glass). This confirms that glass has the highest refractive index among the listed media and hence the minimum speed of light. Why Other Options Are Wrong: Vacuum: Light travels fastest in vacuum, not slowest, so vacuum cannot give minimum speed. Air: Air is only slightly denser than vacuum, so the speed of light is still high in air compared to liquids and solids. Water: Although light travels slower in water than in air, water is still usually less optically dense than common glass, so the speed is not minimum in water among these options. Common Pitfalls: Many learners incorrectly think that water provides the minimum speed because it is a liquid and seems denser than glass in everyday experience. Others confuse the idea of mechanical waves, which may behave differently, with electromagnetic waves such as light. Another common mistake is to assume that vacuum slows light, when in fact vacuum provides the maximum speed. It is essential to connect this topic with refractive index and remember that higher refractive index implies lower speed of light in that medium. Final Answer: The speed of light is minimum when it passes through Glass among the given options.

Question 3

In nuclear physics, nuclear sizes are conventionally expressed using which special unit?

Accepted Answer

Introduction / Context: In nuclear physics, scientists deal with extremely small dimensions, much smaller than atomic sizes. Ordinary units like metre or centimetre are not convenient for expressing nuclear radii, so special submultiples are used. This question checks whether you know the standard unit used for nuclear sizes and can distinguish it from units used for atomic dimensions or physical quantities like force and magnetic field strength. Given Data / Assumptions: The question asks specifically about nuclear sizes, that is, the typical dimension or radius of an atomic nucleus. Options include Fermi, Angstrom, Newton, and Tesla. We use standard definitions as accepted in physics. No calculation is needed; this is a conceptual recall question. Concept / Approach: Nuclear radii are of the order of 10^-15 metre. A handy unit for such lengths is the fermi, named after the physicist Enrico Fermi. One fermi is equal to 10^-15 metre. In contrast, the angstrom is 10^-10 metre and is more suitable for atomic and molecular dimensions, not nuclear radii. Newton is the SI unit of force, and Tesla is the SI unit of magnetic flux density or magnetic field. Therefore, only one of the listed units is used to express nuclear sizes directly. Step-by-Step Solution: Step 1: Recall the approximate size scale of nuclei, which is about 10^-15 metre. Step 2: Remember that the unit fermi (fm) is defined as 1 fermi = 10^-15 metre, which matches the nuclear size scale. Step 3: Recall that 1 angstrom (Å) equals 10^-10 metre, suitable for atoms and molecules, but this is much larger than a typical nucleus. Step 4: Recognise that Newton is a unit of force and Tesla is a unit of magnetic field, so neither expresses length. Step 5: Conclude that the correct unit used to express nuclear sizes is the fermi. Verification / Alternative check: Consulting standard nuclear physics relations, nuclear radius R is often given by R = R0 * A^(1/3), where R0 is around 1.2 to 1.4 fermi. This formula explicitly uses fermi as the length unit. Additionally, nuclear scattering experiments and nuclear models quote radii directly in fm. This independent theory and data use confirms that fermi is the appropriate unit. Other length units like picometre (10^-12 metre) or nanometre (10^-9 metre) may appear in advanced contexts, but for classical descriptions of nuclear size, fermi is the conventional choice. Why Other Options Are Wrong: Angstrom: Used mainly for atomic and molecular dimensions, approximately 10^-10 metre, too large for nuclear radii. Newton: Unit of force in the SI system, not a unit of length at all. Tesla: Unit of magnetic flux density or magnetic field strength, also not a unit of length. Common Pitfalls: A frequent error is confusing angstrom with fermi because both are used for very small distances. Students may also ignore what physical quantity a unit represents and choose Newton or Tesla by mistake. To avoid such confusion, always connect each unit with the physical quantity it measures. For nuclear sizes, remember the scale 10^-15 metre and the name fermi associated with Enrico Fermi and nuclear physics. Final Answer: Nuclear sizes are typically expressed in the unit Fermi (1 fermi = 10^-15 metre).

Question 4

For expressing the radius of an atomic nucleus, which of the following units is the most suitable?

Accepted Answer

Introduction / Context: This question focuses on choosing an appropriate length unit for nuclear radius. In physics, choosing the correct order of magnitude and suitable units is essential for clear scientific communication. Nuclear radii are extremely small and are not conveniently expressed in common macroscopic units. Knowing whether to use micrometre, nanometre, angstrom, or fermi reflects your familiarity with scales from atomic physics and nuclear physics. Given Data / Assumptions: Nuclear radius is typically of the order of 10^-15 metre. Available units: micrometre, nanometre, fermi, angstrom. Standard scientific definitions of each unit are assumed. We aim for the unit that most naturally matches the nuclear length scale. Concept / Approach: We compare the magnitude of each unit with the actual nuclear size. A micrometre (µm) is 10^-6 metre, a nanometre is 10^-9 metre, and an angstrom is 10^-10 metre. All of these are much larger than 10^-15 metre. The fermi (also called femtometre) is defined as 10^-15 metre, which directly matches the typical size of nuclei, making it the most convenient and widely used unit in nuclear physics literature. Step-by-Step Solution: Step 1: Recall that nuclear radii are of the order 1 to 10 femtometres (10^-15 metre). Step 2: Write the definitions: 1 micrometre = 10^-6 metre, 1 nanometre = 10^-9 metre, 1 angstrom = 10^-10 metre, 1 fermi = 10^-15 metre. Step 3: Compare each unit with 10^-15 metre. Micrometre, nanometre, and angstrom are many powers of ten larger. Step 4: Observe that only fermi has exactly 10^-15 metre as its value, aligning with nuclear dimensions. Step 5: Conclude that fermi is the most suitable unit for expressing nuclear radius. Verification / Alternative check: Nuclear physics formulas and experimental results almost always quote radii using femtometres or fermi. For example, the empirical formula R = R0 * A^(1/3) often uses R0 around 1.2 fermi. This convention is seen in textbooks and research papers. While it is mathematically possible to convert nuclear radius into nanometres or angstrom, such values would be 10^-6 to 10^-5 of those units, which is awkward. Thus, for clarity and standard practice, fermi is the correct choice. Why Other Options Are Wrong: Micrometre: Suitable for microscopic but still relatively large biological structures, not for nuclear sizes which are much smaller. Nanometre: Appropriate for atomic and molecular scales, but still too large for nuclei, which are 10^6 times smaller. Angstrom: Common for atomic radii and bond lengths, but not for subatomic nuclear radii, which are 10^5 times smaller than an angstrom. Common Pitfalls: Learners sometimes confuse atomic and nuclear scales and may select nanometre or angstrom. Another pitfall is to focus on which unit sounds more familiar instead of checking the numerical exponent of ten. To avoid such mistakes, always compare the power of ten of the physical quantity with the unit. For nuclear physics, remember that femtometre or fermi is the natural unit. Final Answer: The most suitable unit for expressing nuclear radius is the Fermi (femtometre, 10^-15 metre).

Question 5

In dimensional analysis, can temperature be expressed as a derived quantity in terms of length, mass and time?

Accepted Answer

Introduction / Context: Dimensional analysis classifies physical quantities as either fundamental or derived. Fundamental quantities are independent and cannot be expressed in terms of other base quantities. Derived quantities can be expressed as combinations of these base dimensions. This question examines your understanding of where temperature fits in this framework and whether it can be expressed only using length, mass, and time. Given Data / Assumptions: We consider the standard SI system of units. Base quantities include length (L), mass (M), time (T), electric current (I), thermodynamic temperature (Θ), amount of substance (N), and luminous intensity (J in some notations). The question offers combinations of length, mass and time only. No explicit formula relating temperature only to L, M and T is provided. Concept / Approach: In the SI system, temperature is a fundamental quantity with its own independent dimension, often denoted by Θ. Quantities like velocity and acceleration are derived from length and time, while force and energy are derived from length, mass and time. However, temperature is not defined in terms of these mechanical quantities. It is associated with the average kinetic energy of particles, but dimensionally it is treated as an independent base quantity. Therefore, temperature cannot be purely expressed as a derived quantity using only length, mass and time. Step-by-Step Solution: Step 1: Recall the list of SI base quantities: length, mass, time, electric current, thermodynamic temperature, amount of substance, and luminous intensity. Step 2: Note that temperature is itself one of these base quantities (thermodynamic temperature), usually measured in kelvin. Step 3: Recognise that derived quantities have dimensions formed from combinations of base quantities, such as speed (L T^-1) or force (M L T^-2). Step 4: Observe that there is no general dimensional formula that expresses temperature solely as a combination of L, M, and T. Step 5: Therefore, temperature cannot be expressed as a derived quantity in terms of only length, mass and time. Step 6: Conclude that the correct choice is that temperature cannot be expressed in terms of any of the given combinations. Verification / Alternative check: In dimensional analysis tables, temperature is denoted independently as [Θ]. When we write the dimensional formula of other quantities like gas constant R or Boltzmann constant k, temperature appears as a base dimension, not something eliminated in favour of L, M and T. This confirms that temperature is not reducible to mechanical dimensions alone. Even though microscopic interpretations relate temperature to average kinetic energy per particle, which includes mass and velocity, the proportionality constants and statistical nature mean that temperature retains its own base dimension in the SI system. Why Other Options Are Wrong: Length and mass: No standard dimensional formula expresses temperature only as L and M. Mass and time: This pair does not capture the concept of temperature and appears in no fundamental definition of it. Length, mass and time: Although many mechanical quantities use this combination, temperature is not one of them because it is an independent thermodynamic base quantity. Common Pitfalls: A common misconception is to think that because temperature is related to average kinetic energy, it must be expressible in terms of M, L and T. However, this confuses physical interpretation with dimensional independence. Dimensional analysis treats temperature as a separate axis in dimensional space. Remember that not all physical ideas that relate conceptually will reduce dimensionally to the same base quantities. Final Answer: Temperature cannot be expressed as a derived quantity using only length, mass and time. The correct option is In terms of none of these.

Question 6

Among the following physical quantities, which one is not a vector quantity and has only magnitude but no direction?

Accepted Answer

Introduction / Context: In mechanics, physical quantities are classified as scalars or vectors. Scalar quantities have only magnitude, while vector quantities possess both magnitude and direction. Many exam questions test whether you can correctly classify common quantities such as speed, velocity, torque, and displacement. This question checks your ability to distinguish between a scalar and similar-looking vector quantities. Given Data / Assumptions: We are given four options: speed, velocity, torque, and displacement. We use standard physics definitions of scalar and vector quantities. The question asks specifically which quantity is not a vector. We assume motion in classical mechanics, not in any relativistic or quantum context. Concept / Approach: A vector quantity has both magnitude and a specific direction, and it follows the rules of vector addition. A scalar quantity has magnitude only and does not depend on direction. Velocity is defined as the rate of change of displacement with direction. Displacement and torque are also vector quantities, where displacement describes directed distance and torque represents the turning effect with a specified sense of rotation. Speed, however, is defined as the magnitude of velocity and does not involve direction. Therefore, speed is a scalar, not a vector. Step-by-Step Solution: Step 1: Recall that speed is the distance travelled per unit time, without specifying direction. Step 2: Recall that velocity is the displacement per unit time, and it is associated with a definite direction. Step 3: Displacement is the shortest directed distance between initial and final positions, clearly a vector. Step 4: Torque is the cross product of position vector and force, which gives it direction (often represented by the right hand rule). Step 5: Since only speed lacks direction and is described solely by magnitude, it must be a scalar. Step 6: Therefore, the physical quantity that is not a vector is speed. Verification / Alternative check: In vector notation, velocity, displacement and torque are usually written with arrow signs or boldface letters, for example v, s, and τ. These quantities add using vector laws such as the triangle or parallelogram rule. Speed is usually written without an arrow, and when you combine speeds you typically do so by normal arithmetic, not by vector addition, unless first converting them to velocities with directions. Textbook tables of scalar and vector quantities consistently list speed as scalar and the other three as vectors, confirming this classification. Why Other Options Are Wrong: Velocity: It clearly has direction and magnitude, for example 20 km/h due east, making it a vector quantity. Torque: Produced by a force acting at a distance, torque has direction given by the right hand rule and is treated as a vector (or axial vector) in physics. Displacement: Represents directed distance from one point to another and is one of the simplest examples of a vector quantity. Common Pitfalls: Students sometimes confuse speed and velocity because their magnitudes can be numerically equal. The key difference is that velocity always includes direction, while speed does not. Another error is assuming that any quantity associated with motion is automatically a vector. The safer method is to ask whether the quantity must specify direction to be completely described. If direction is not needed, the quantity is scalar. This reasoning shows why speed is scalar and not a vector quantity. Final Answer: The quantity that is not a vector is Speed, which is a scalar with magnitude only.

Question 7

Which of the following is not considered a unit of time in physics and everyday measurement?

Accepted Answer

Introduction / Context: Time is one of the fundamental physical quantities, and there are many units used to measure it, from microsecond to year. Competitive exams often ask you to identify which terms represent valid units of time and which are used in other contexts. This question checks whether you can distinguish between real time units and a term related to angular measurement in astronomy. Given Data / Assumptions: Options include parallactic second, microsecond, leap year, and solar day. We use standard physical and astronomical definitions. The question asks for a term that is not actually used as a time unit. We assume common usage in science and daily life, not hypothetical systems. Concept / Approach: Microsecond, leap year, and solar day are clearly connected with time measurement. A microsecond is a submultiple of a second (10^-6 second). A leap year is a year with an extra day used to correct the calendar and represents a specific duration of time. A solar day is the time taken for Earth to rotate once relative to the Sun, about 24 hours. Parallactic second, however, refers to a second of arc used in parallax measurements, relating to angular distance and the definition of the parsec, and is therefore not directly a time unit. Step-by-Step Solution: Step 1: Recognise that microsecond is a fraction of a second, a standard SI submultiple for time. Step 2: Identify leap year as a specific type of year in calendar systems, still representing a duration of time. Step 3: Recall that a solar day measures the time taken for one full apparent rotation of the Sun in the sky from noon to noon. Step 4: Understand that parallactic second is related to parallax in astronomy, where angles such as arcseconds are used. Step 5: Note that an arcsecond, or second of arc, measures angle, not time, though it uses the word second. Step 6: Conclude that parallactic second is not a unit of time, while the others are. Verification / Alternative check: Checking any physics or metrology reference, time units are listed as second, millisecond, microsecond, minute, hour, day, year, and so on. These lists never include parallactic second as a time unit. In contrast, astronomy texts define parallax angles using arcseconds to quantify small angular separations in the sky. The similarity in name arises because both seconds of time and seconds of arc historically relate to sexagesimal subdivisions, but the quantities they measure are different: one measures time, the other angle. Why Other Options Are Wrong: Microsecond: Defined as 10^-6 second, it is a standard SI submultiple of time and used widely in science and technology. Leap year: Represents a specific time duration (one year with 366 days) and is a calendar unit based on time. Solar day: Defined as the time interval between two successive noons, approximately 24 hours, and clearly a time unit. Common Pitfalls: The main trap is relying on the word second in parallactic second and assuming it must refer to time. Another source of confusion is the existence of arcminute and arcsecond in angular measurement, which share names with time units but belong to geometry and astronomy. To avoid this, always check whether the quantity describes duration or angle. If it describes angle, it is not a time unit even if the word second appears in its name. Final Answer: The term that is not a unit of time is Parallactic second.

Question 8

Two electric bulbs rated 25 W – 220 V and 100 W – 220 V are connected in series to a 440 V supply. Which bulb will fuse first?

Accepted Answer

Introduction / Context: This question combines basic circuit theory with the practical understanding of how electric bulbs behave when connected in series. The power rating and voltage rating of a bulb indicate the conditions under which it operates safely. When these bulbs are connected in a different way from the intended design, such as in series across a higher voltage, the voltage distribution can change and may cause one of them to fail or fuse. The problem checks whether you can use electrical formulas for resistance and power to identify which bulb is more likely to blow first. Given Data / Assumptions: Bulb 1: 25 W, 220 V (designed to consume 25 W when 220 V is across it). Bulb 2: 100 W, 220 V (designed to consume 100 W at 220 V). Both bulbs are connected in series. Total applied voltage is 440 V (twice 220 V). We assume ideal conditions: resistances are constant and power ratings are correct for 220 V operation. Concept / Approach: From the rating P = V^2 / R, we can compute the resistance of each bulb. A bulb with lower wattage at the same rated voltage has higher resistance. In series, the same current flows through both resistances. The voltage drop across each bulb is given by V = I * R, so the bulb with higher resistance will experience a greater share of the total voltage. If the voltage across a bulb exceeds its rated voltage significantly, it can fuse (burn out). Therefore, we need to calculate the resistances and voltage drops in the series combination. Step-by-Step Solution: Step 1: Use P = V^2 / R to find resistance of each bulb at its rated values. Step 2: For the 25 W bulb: R1 = 220^2 / 25 ohm = 1936 ohm. Step 3: For the 100 W bulb: R2 = 220^2 / 100 ohm = 484 ohm. Step 4: Total resistance in series is R_total = R1 + R2 = 1936 + 484 = 2420 ohm. Step 5: Total current in the circuit is I = V_total / R_total = 440 / 2420 ampere ≈ 0.182 A. Step 6: Voltage across 25 W bulb is V1 = I * R1 ≈ 0.182 * 1936 ≈ 352 V. Step 7: Voltage across 100 W bulb is V2 = I * R2 ≈ 0.182 * 484 ≈ 88 V. Step 8: Compare these voltages with the rated voltage 220 V. The 25 W bulb gets about 352 V, much more than its rated voltage, so it is very likely to fuse. The 100 W bulb receives only about 88 V, which is below its rating and is safe. Verification / Alternative check: As a rule of thumb, in series connection at the same rated voltage, the bulb with lower wattage has higher resistance and therefore higher voltage drop. Since the total applied voltage here equals the sum of the rated voltages of the two bulbs (220 V + 220 V = 440 V), one might guess each bulb will get 220 V. However, the distribution is not equal because their resistances are different. The calculation confirms that the weaker 25 W bulb is overstressed with a much higher voltage and thus will fuse, while the 100 W bulb will not reach its rated conditions. Why Other Options Are Wrong: Both bulbs will fuse: Only the 25 W bulb experiences a large overvoltage. The 100 W bulb is actually under voltage. 100 W bulb: It receives only about 88 V, which is far below 220 V, so it is unlikely to fuse under these conditions. Neither bulb will fuse: The 25 W bulb experiences about 352 V, which is significantly higher than its design voltage and is likely to blow, so this option is incorrect. Common Pitfalls: A common mistake is to assume that in series each component shares equal voltage, which is only true if the resistances are equal. Another pitfall is to think that higher wattage implies a weaker bulb, when actually for the same voltage, lower wattage means higher resistance and therefore a higher voltage share in series. To avoid confusion, always calculate or compare resistances when bulbs or resistors have different power ratings. Final Answer: The bulb that will fuse first when connected in series to a 440 V supply is the 25 W bulb.

Question 9

An air bubble inside water behaves optically like which one of the following objects?

Accepted Answer

Introduction / Context: This question deals with the behaviour of light at the boundary between two media of different optical densities. An air bubble in water is a classic example used in optics to test whether students understand how curved surfaces refract light. It requires you to visualise the bubble as a region of lower refractive index surrounded by a higher refractive index medium and then decide whether it will converge or diverge light rays, just like a particular type of lens or mirror. Given Data / Assumptions: There is an air bubble inside water. Water has a higher refractive index than air. The bubble boundary is approximately spherical and smooth. We are comparing the behaviour of the bubble to that of lenses or mirrors. Concept / Approach: A lens works by refracting light at curved surfaces. A convex lens in air converges parallel rays because the glass has a higher refractive index than the surrounding air. A concave lens in air diverges parallel rays. When the roles are reversed and the surrounding medium is denser (water) while the enclosed region is rarer (air), the same shape behaves in the opposite way. An air bubble in water has the shape of a converging lens but consists of lower refractive index material inside, so its net effect is diverging. Therefore it behaves like a concave lens, which diverges rays passing through it. Step-by-Step Solution: Step 1: Recognise that water has a higher refractive index than air, so water is optically denser. Step 2: Visualise the air bubble as a roughly spherical region of air surrounded by water. Step 3: Recall that in air, a convex glass lens converges light because glass is denser than air. Step 4: Note that if we keep the same shape but swap which region is denser, the behaviour reverses. Step 5: For an air bubble in water, the inside (air) is rarer and outside (water) is denser, so the net effect is to diverge rays coming through the bubble. Step 6: A device that diverges parallel rays is optically equivalent to a concave lens. Verification / Alternative check: In ray diagrams for a spherical bubble, tracing incident parallel rays shows that after refraction at both surfaces, the emergent rays spread out rather than converging to a point. This is the signature of a diverging lens. Many textbooks explicitly state that an air bubble in water behaves like a concave lens, and this result is widely used in qualitative problems in geometrical optics. The same idea applies to cavities filled with lower index material inside a higher index medium. Why Other Options Are Wrong: Convex lens: A convex lens in a rarer outside medium converges light, which is not what an air bubble in water does. Convex mirror: Mirrors reflect light rather than refract it, and an air bubble is a transparent region, not a reflecting surface. Concave mirror: Again, a mirror reflects light, whereas the bubble refracts light at its surfaces, so mirror options are not appropriate here. Common Pitfalls: Students often associate convex shape mechanically with convergence and concave shape with divergence without considering refractive index. Another pitfall is to forget that the surrounding medium has changed here. To correctly answer such questions, you must always consider the relative refractive indices of the media and whether the shape is in a denser or rarer surrounding. Thinking only in terms of shape can lead to incorrect conclusions. Final Answer: An air bubble in water behaves optically like a Concave lens because it diverges light rays passing through it.

Question 10

When a sound wave passes from air into water, which of the following properties of the wave remains unchanged?

Accepted Answer

Introduction / Context: Sound is a mechanical wave that requires a medium to propagate. When sound travels from one medium to another, such as from air to water, some of its properties change while others remain the same. Examinations frequently test whether you understand which characteristics depend on the medium and which are determined by the source of the sound. This question focuses on how frequency, wavelength, speed, and amplitude behave at a boundary between media. Given Data / Assumptions: The sound originates from a source in air. The sound wave passes from air into water. The medium changes from air (less dense) to water (denser). We neglect complex effects like strong reflection and consider the general principle for transmitted sound. Concept / Approach: For a wave, the fundamental relation is v = f * λ, where v is wave velocity, f is frequency, and λ is wavelength. Frequency is determined by the source of the sound and does not change when the wave enters a new medium. However, the velocity of sound depends strongly on the properties of the medium, such as density and elasticity, so it changes when moving from air to water. Since v changes while f remains constant, the wavelength adjusts accordingly to satisfy v = f * λ. Amplitude can also change due to partial reflection and transmission at the interface. Therefore, frequency is the property that remains unchanged. Step-by-Step Solution: Step 1: Recall the relation v = f * λ for any wave. Step 2: Identify that the source of the sound is in air, which sets the frequency of vibration. Step 3: When the wave enters water, the medium changes, so the speed of sound changes because it depends on the medium's elasticity and density. Step 4: Since v changes and f is fixed by the source, wavelength λ must change to satisfy v = f * λ. Step 5: Amplitude can also be altered at the boundary due to partial reflection and absorption. Step 6: Therefore, the only quantity that stays constant during transmission from air to water is the frequency. Verification / Alternative check: Practical examples support this conclusion. When you hear a sound underwater that originated in air, the pitch of the sound (which depends on frequency) is perceived the same, although the loudness and quality may change. Pitch is tied directly to frequency. Textbook explanations of wave refraction also stress that frequency does not change at a boundary, whereas speed and wavelength do. This is analogous to light waves, where frequency remains constant when passing from air into glass, but speed and wavelength change because of the different optical properties. Why Other Options Are Wrong: Velocity: The velocity of sound clearly changes when the medium changes, because water transmits sound faster than air due to its physical properties. Wavelength: Since v = f * λ and v changes while f remains constant, wavelength must adjust, so it does not remain the same. Amplitude: Amplitude can be reduced or otherwise altered at the boundary due to reflection and absorption effects, so it is not constant either. Common Pitfalls: Students sometimes think that wavelength remains constant and frequency changes, but it is actually the reverse. This confusion often comes from focusing only on the formula without considering the role of the source. Remember that the medium controls speed, the source controls frequency, and the wavelength adjusts to maintain the wave relation. Keeping this idea clear helps avoid many conceptual errors in wave problems, for both sound and light. Final Answer: When sound travels from air to water, the property that remains unchanged is its Frequency.

Question 11

Raindrops in the atmosphere tend to acquire a nearly spherical shape mainly due to which physical phenomenon?

Accepted Answer

Introduction / Context: The shape of small liquid drops, such as raindrops or water droplets from a tap, is a classic topic in basic physics. At very small sizes, gravity is relatively weak compared to molecular forces at the surface of the liquid. This question tests your understanding of why these drops become roughly spherical and which physical property of liquids governs this behaviour. It is often asked in general science and competitive exams to check conceptual clarity about surface phenomena. Given Data / Assumptions: We are concerned with small raindrops or liquid droplets in air. External influences like strong winds or collisions are ignored. The main competing effects are surface tension, viscosity, friction with surrounding air, and elasticity of the liquid. We consider a droplet free to adjust its shape under the action of these forces. Concept / Approach: Surface tension is the tendency of the surface of a liquid to contract and reduce its area due to molecular attraction. For a given volume, a sphere has the minimum possible surface area. Therefore, when surface tension dominates over other forces, a liquid drop will try to become spherical to minimize its surface energy. Viscosity relates to internal friction within the fluid and affects flow, not the equilibrium shape directly. Friction with air influences motion, not shape at rest. Elasticity usually refers to solids, not to the free surface of liquids. Thus, surface tension is the primary reason for the nearly spherical shape of small drops. Step-by-Step Solution: Step 1: Recall that for a given volume, the sphere is the geometrical shape with minimum surface area. Step 2: Understand that surface tension tends to reduce the surface area of a liquid, pulling the surface molecules inward. Step 3: For a very small droplet, the force due to gravity is small, so it cannot distort the droplet significantly from spherical shape. Step 4: The dominating effect is surface tension, which pulls the molecules into a shape with minimum surface area, that is, a sphere. Step 5: Viscosity and friction may influence how the drop moves or falls, but not its final equilibrium shape. Step 6: Conclude that surface tension is the phenomenon responsible for raindrops becoming nearly spherical. Verification / Alternative check: Laboratory observations of small water drops in microgravity or floating on surfaces also show nearly spherical shapes, consistent with surface tension dominance. Mathematical models of capillary phenomena treat the shape of drops as the result of balancing surface tension and other forces. When gravitational and inertial effects are negligible, the equilibrium shape is a sphere. In contrast, large raindrops can become distorted or even break up due to air resistance, which explains why real raindrops are not perfect spheres but still originate from this basic tendency driven by surface tension. Why Other Options Are Wrong: Viscosity: This property measures internal resistance to flow; it affects how quickly the drop can change shape but not the preferred equilibrium shape itself. Friction: Friction between air and the drop mainly affects the motion and path of the drop, not its tendency to be spherical. Elasticity: Elasticity refers mainly to deformation of solids and is not the controlling factor for the free surface shape of a liquid droplet. Common Pitfalls: A typical mistake is to associate any resistance to deformation with viscosity or elasticity, overlooking the special role of surface tension at liquid surfaces. Another pitfall is thinking that raindrops are shaped by wind alone. While air resistance can distort larger drops, the fundamental reason small drops are nearly spherical is surface tension. Remembering that spheres minimize surface area and that surface tension seeks to reduce surface area helps overcome these misunderstandings. Final Answer: Raindrops acquire a nearly spherical shape mainly because of Surface tension of the liquid.

Question 12

When a bottle of perfume is opened in one corner of a room and the smell soon spreads throughout the room, which physical process is mainly responsible for this spreading?

Accepted Answer

Introduction / Context: Everyday observations often illustrate important physical processes. The spreading of perfume smell across a room is a classic example used in school physics to explain how particles move from regions of high concentration to regions of low concentration. This question tests your ability to connect such a familiar phenomenon with the correct scientific term for the underlying process. Given Data / Assumptions: A bottle of perfume is opened in one corner of a closed or semi-closed room. Initially, perfume molecules are concentrated near the bottle. After some time, people in other parts of the room can smell the perfume. We neglect air currents produced by fans or wind for the basic conceptual explanation. Concept / Approach: Diffusion is the process by which particles of a substance move from a region of higher concentration to a region of lower concentration due to their random thermal motion. Gas molecules are in constant random motion, and their collisions cause them to spread out over time. Surface tension deals with liquid surfaces, capillarity refers to rise or fall of liquids in narrow tubes, and viscosity relates to internal friction in fluids. None of these explain the gradual spreading of perfume molecules through air. Therefore, diffusion is the correct process that describes how the scent reaches all parts of the room. Step-by-Step Solution: Step 1: Recognise that perfume consists of volatile molecules that readily evaporate into the air. Step 2: Near the open bottle, the concentration of perfume molecules in air is high. Step 3: Over time, these molecules undergo random motion and collide with air molecules, gradually spreading out. Step 4: This random spreading from high to low concentration regions is defined as diffusion. Step 5: Capillarity, surface tension, and viscosity have no direct role in transporting perfume scent across the entire room. Step 6: Therefore, the process responsible for the spreading of smell is diffusion. Verification / Alternative check: The explanation is consistent with experiments such as placing a bottle of ammonia or other strong-smelling gas in one place and observing how the smell reaches different parts of a room even without visible bulk airflow. Diffusion is a fundamental concept in kinetic theory of gases and in chemistry, where it also explains mixing of gases and liquids at the molecular level. Even if convection currents or airflow are present, diffusion still plays a role at the microscopic scale and is the core process highlighted in basic science examples like this one. Why Other Options Are Wrong: Surface tension: Acts at the interface between liquid and air, influencing droplet shape but not responsible for the spread of gas molecules through the room. Capillarity: Describes liquid rise or fall in thin tubes due to surface tension, not gas spreading in open air. Viscosity: Refers to internal friction in liquids and gases that resists flow; it can slow down motion but does not by itself cause spreading from high to low concentration. Common Pitfalls: Some learners confuse diffusion with convection (bulk movement of fluid) or think that smell travels only due to wind. While air currents can speed up the distribution of perfume molecules, the fundamental microscopic process is diffusion driven by random molecular motion. It is also easy to be distracted by other fluid properties listed in options without recalling their exact definitions. To avoid confusion, always link diffusion with concentration gradients and random molecular motion in gases or liquids. Final Answer: The smell of perfume spreading throughout the room is mainly due to the process of Diffusion.

Question 13

Why is it more difficult to walk on smooth ice than on a rough concrete road?

Accepted Answer

Introduction / Context: This question examines your understanding of friction and its role in walking. In everyday life, we know that walking on a smooth icy surface is slippery and difficult, whereas walking on a rough concrete road feels safer. The underlying reason is related to the amount of friction between your feet (or shoes) and the surface. This concept is fundamental in mechanics and is frequently tested in general physics and aptitude exams. Given Data / Assumptions: The surfaces being compared are ice and rough concrete. A person is attempting to walk normally on both surfaces. No special footwear with spikes or grips is being used. We assume that the main forces at play are normal reaction and friction between foot and ground. Concept / Approach: Friction is the resistive force that opposes relative motion between two surfaces in contact. Static friction is necessary for walking, because when you push backward on the ground with your foot, friction pushes you forward. If friction is too small, the foot slips instead of gripping the surface, and you cannot walk effectively. Ice is smooth and often has a thin layer of water on top, making the coefficient of friction between shoe and ice very small. Concrete, being rough and dry, offers a much higher friction. Therefore, low friction on ice is what makes walking difficult, not higher friction or softness of the material. Step-by-Step Solution: Step 1: Recall that to walk, your foot must push backward on the ground so that friction can push you forward. Step 2: Understand that sufficient static friction is needed to prevent your foot from slipping when you push. Step 3: On a rough concrete road, the coefficient of friction between shoe and ground is relatively high, providing good grip. Step 4: On ice, the surface is smooth and often partially melted, resulting in a very low coefficient of friction. Step 5: Low friction on ice means that when you push backward, your foot tends to slip instead of gripping, making walking difficult. Step 6: Therefore, the difficulty arises because there is very little friction between the ice and the feet pressing it. Verification / Alternative check: You can verify this by observing people slipping more easily on icy pavements than on dry ground. Special shoes with spikes or shoes for ice skating increase friction or use controlled sliding to manage motion on ice. In contrast, rubber soles on concrete generally provide good traction. Textbook examples and experiments, such as sliding blocks on different surfaces, also show that smoother surfaces like ice reduce friction, while rough surfaces like concrete increase it. All these observations support the conclusion that low friction is the main cause of difficulty when walking on ice. Why Other Options Are Wrong: Ice is soft compared to concrete: Softness is not the primary factor here; even if a material is soft, what matters is the frictional force available for walking. There is more friction between the ice and the feet: This is the opposite of the true situation. More friction would actually make walking easier, not harder. None of these: Since one option clearly matches the correct explanation, this catch-all option is incorrect. Common Pitfalls: A common misunderstanding is to think that less friction is always better because it allows smoother motion. However, for walking, turning, and stopping safely, a certain minimum friction is essential. Another pitfall is confusing hardness or softness with friction; they are not the same property. When solving such questions, always focus on how friction helps or hinders the motion being described. Final Answer: It is more difficult to walk on ice because there is very little friction between the ice and the feet pressing it.

Question 14

A solid metal sphere has a spherical cavity inside it. When the entire metal ball is heated uniformly, what happens to the volume of the internal cavity?

Accepted Answer

Introduction / Context: Thermal expansion is a key concept in physics and engineering. When a solid is heated, its dimensions usually increase. A classic conceptual question asks what happens to a cavity inside a solid object when the object is heated. Many learners incorrectly imagine that the cavity shrinks because the surrounding material expands inward. This question tests whether you understand that thermal expansion is a uniform scaling effect that affects the entire body, including the space of the cavity. Given Data / Assumptions: We have a solid ball of metal with a spherical cavity inside. The metal sphere is heated uniformly, so its temperature increases throughout. The material of the metal expands when heated, following its coefficient of linear or volumetric expansion. No external constraints are applied that would prevent free expansion. Concept / Approach: Thermal expansion in solids causes each linear dimension to increase proportionally to the temperature rise. For an unconstrained body, every length scale expands outward from the centre. If you imagine the cavity as if it were filled with the same metal and then removed after expansion, the expansion would have increased its size as well. Therefore, the cavity also grows in volume when the metal expands. The correct view is that the entire object, including the shape of the cavity, scales up. The cavity does not behave independently or shrink; instead, it expands along with the rest of the solid. Step-by-Step Solution: Step 1: Recall that for a solid with coefficient of linear expansion α, each linear dimension L changes approximately by ΔL = α L ΔT. Step 2: When the metal sphere is heated, all distances measured within the metal, including distances that define the boundary of the cavity, increase. Step 3: Consider a thought experiment where the cavity is initially filled with the same metal. After heating, that imaginary metal region would expand outward. Step 4: If we then remove that imaginary metal filling, the space that remains as the cavity must be larger than before heating. Step 5: Because volume is related to the cube of linear dimensions, any increase in linear size leads to a larger volume for both the outer sphere and the cavity. Step 6: Hence, the volume of the cavity increases when the sphere is heated. Verification / Alternative check: This result is consistent with mathematical treatments of thermal expansion, where overall linear scale is multiplied by a factor (1 + α ΔT). Applied uniformly, all radii, including the inner radius of the cavity, are increased by the same factor. Consequently, the inner radius grows, so the cavity becomes larger. Experiments with rings and rods, where metal rings expand and can no longer fit on rods when heated, follow the same logic: the hole in the ring also expands. This analogy reinforces the idea that cavities expand when the surrounding material undergoes uniform thermal expansion. Why Other Options Are Wrong: The volume of the cavity decreases: This reflects the incorrect intuition that the metal expands inward, squeezing the cavity, but uniform expansion actually increases all distances from the centre. The volume of the cavity remains unchanged: This would mean no thermal expansion at the cavity boundary, which contradicts the material behaviour. The shape changes but volume stays same: For uniform isotropic expansion, the spherical shape of the cavity is preserved and the volume increases, not stays constant. Common Pitfalls: The most common mistake is visualising expansion as pushing into the cavity rather than uniformly stretching the material. To avoid this, always imagine a cavity as space occupied by imaginary material that expands just like the rest of the solid. Once you adopt this picture, it becomes easy to see that the cavity must enlarge when the body is heated. Another pitfall is forgetting that expansion is three dimensional, so changes in radius produce even larger relative changes in volume. Final Answer: When the metal ball is heated uniformly, the volume of the cavity increases along with the rest of the sphere.

Question 15

In the International System of Units (SI), what is the standard unit of pressure?

Accepted Answer

Introduction / Context: Pressure is a widely used physical quantity in mechanics, fluid dynamics, and everyday applications such as tyre pressure and atmospheric pressure. It is defined as force per unit area. Competitive examinations often check whether you know the correct SI unit for pressure and can distinguish it from units of force, energy, and other quantities. This question focuses on recalling and understanding the correct unit name associated with pressure in the SI system. Given Data / Assumptions: We are asked specifically about the SI unit of pressure. Options are Pascal, Dyne, Newton, and Joule. We use the standard SI definitions of derived units. No conversion between unit systems is required. Concept / Approach: Pressure P is defined as force F divided by area A, that is P = F / A. In the SI system, force is measured in newtons (N) and area in square metres (m^2). Therefore, the SI derived unit of pressure is newton per square metre (N/m^2), which has the special name Pascal (Pa). Dyne is a unit of force in the centimetre–gram–second (CGS) system. Newton is the SI unit of force, and Joule is the SI unit of energy or work. Only Pascal matches the definition of pressure as a derived SI unit. Step-by-Step Solution: Step 1: Recall the formula for pressure: P = F / A. Step 2: In SI units, force F is measured in newtons (N), and area A is measured in square metres (m^2). Step 3: Combine these to get the SI unit of pressure as N/m^2. Step 4: Remember that the special name given to 1 N/m^2 is 1 Pascal, symbol Pa. Step 5: Recognise that Dyne belongs to the CGS system and is not an SI unit. Step 6: Conclude that the correct SI unit of pressure is Pascal. Verification / Alternative check: Textbooks and scientific references consistently list Pascal as the SI unit of pressure. Examples include atmospheric pressure sometimes expressed as approximately 1.013 × 10^5 Pa. Other pressure units such as bar, millimetre of mercury (mmHg), and atmosphere (atm) are also used, but these are not SI base or derived units; they can be converted into Pascals. This confirms that Pascal is the standard SI unit for pressure, while Newton and Joule are reserved for force and energy respectively. Why Other Options Are Wrong: Dyne: A unit of force in the CGS system. 1 dyne equals 10^-5 newton; it is not a unit of pressure. Newton: The SI unit of force, not a unit of pressure. Pressure uses newtons per square metre, not newtons alone. Joule: The SI unit of work or energy, equal to newton metre. It does not measure pressure. Common Pitfalls: Students sometimes confuse force and pressure, thinking Newton might be a pressure unit simply because pressure involves force. The key is to remember that pressure is force per unit area, so its unit must incorporate both force and area. Another pitfall is mixing SI and CGS units; Dyne and erg are common in older textbooks but are not SI units. Focusing on the definition P = F / A and remembering the name Pascal helps avoid these mistakes. Final Answer: The SI unit of pressure is the Pascal (1 Pa = 1 N/m^2).

Question 16

Ultrasonic waves are used for stirring liquid solutions mainly because they have which important advantage?

Accepted Answer

Introduction / Context: Ultrasonic waves are very high frequency sound waves that are widely used in industry and laboratories for cleaning, welding, medical imaging, and for stirring or mixing liquid solutions. When ultrasonic waves pass through a liquid, they create intense agitation and microscopic movements that are very different from simple mechanical stirring with a rod. This question tests your understanding of why ultrasonic stirring is preferred when a perfectly mixed and homogeneous solution is required. Given Data / Assumptions: We are dealing with ultrasonic waves used for stirring liquid solutions in vessels or reaction containers. Ultrasonic waves have frequencies above the human hearing range, typically above 20 kilohertz. The goal of the process is to obtain a uniform or homogeneous solution throughout the container. We assume that the liquid and solute do not decompose under ultrasonic action and that the apparatus is properly designed. Concept / Approach: When ultrasonic waves propagate through a liquid, they produce rapid compression and rarefaction cycles. This leads to phenomena such as cavitation, where tiny bubbles form and collapse, and intense microstreaming, which is the small scale flow of fluid. These effects cause extremely thorough mixing on a microscopic level. As a result, solute particles are distributed uniformly throughout the solvent much more effectively than with ordinary mechanical stirring. Therefore, the key advantage is the ability of ultrasound to produce perfectly homogeneous solutions, which is the central idea behind the correct option. Step-by-Step Solution: Step 1: Recall that ultrasonic waves are sound waves of very high frequency that can travel through liquids and cause rapid pressure variations. Step 2: These rapid pressure variations lead to cavitation and microstreaming, which generate strong local currents in the liquid. Step 3: These micro currents break up clusters of solute and carry particles into regions where the concentration is lower, enhancing diffusion. Step 4: Over time, this process distributes solute particles evenly, creating a highly uniform or homogeneous solution. Step 5: Noise production, ease of production, and absence of chemical reaction are secondary considerations here and do not directly explain the main advantage for stirring. Step 6: Therefore, the correct option is that ultrasonic waves can produce perfectly homogeneous solutions. Verification / Alternative check: In practical chemical and biochemical laboratories, ultrasonic baths and ultrasonic probes are used to disperse particles, break up agglomerates, and speed up dissolution. Experimental observations show that solutions treated with ultrasound often appear much more uniform and clear compared to those stirred mechanically for the same time. The use of ultrasonic processing in emulsification and nanoparticle dispersion also supports the idea that ultrasonic waves are very effective at creating homogeneous mixtures at small scales. This confirms that perfect or near perfect mixing is the key advantage in this context. Why Other Options Are Wrong: They do not produce noise during operation: In reality, ultrasonic equipment can still produce audible noise and is not used mainly for silent operation. They are very easy to produce: Generating ultrasonic waves requires special transducers and circuits, so ease of production is not the main reason for their use in stirring. They do not cause any chemical reactions in the solution: Ultrasonic waves sometimes even enhance reaction rates, so this is not a universal or defining property. Common Pitfalls: Students may be distracted by options about noise or ease of production because they sound appealing but do not address the core physical effect. Another common mistake is assuming that any kind of shaking or agitation is similar, without recognising that ultrasonic waves act at the microscopic level, far beyond what a simple stirrer can do. To answer correctly, focus on the main benefit in mixing technology, which is the production of very uniform and homogeneous solutions. Final Answer: Ultrasonic waves are used for stirring liquid solutions mainly because they can produce perfectly homogeneous solutions.

Question 17

Why is the core of an electromagnet usually made of soft iron rather than steel or other materials?

Accepted Answer

Introduction / Context: Electromagnets are coils of wire that become strongly magnetised when electric current flows through them. The material placed as the core inside the coil has a major effect on how strong and how controllable the magnetic field is. In practical devices such as relays, electric bells, and lifting magnets, the core material is usually soft iron. This question checks whether you understand the magnetic properties that make soft iron suitable, especially the ideas of magnetic susceptibility and retentivity. Given Data / Assumptions: The core is part of a typical electromagnet used in basic electrical devices. Soft iron and other magnetic materials such as steel differ in magnetic susceptibility and retentivity. We want the electromagnet to magnetise strongly when current flows and demagnetise quickly when current is switched off. We assume standard definitions of susceptibility and retentivity from magnetism theory. Concept / Approach: Magnetic susceptibility measures how easily a material becomes magnetised in an external magnetic field. Retentivity measures how strongly a material retains magnetisation when the external field is removed. For an electromagnet, we want a core that quickly becomes strongly magnetised when current is applied, which requires large susceptibility. At the same time, we want it to lose magnetisation almost completely when current is switched off, which requires small retentivity. Soft iron has exactly this combination: high susceptibility and low retentivity. Hard steel, in contrast, has high retentivity and is used for permanent magnets instead, not for electromagnets. Step-by-Step Solution: Step 1: Recall that in an electromagnet, current through the coil creates a magnetic field that magnetises the core. Step 2: For a strong magnet when the current flows, the core material should become magnetised easily; this means it should have large magnetic susceptibility. Step 3: When the current is switched off, we generally want the electromagnet to lose its magnetism, so that the device can reset or release objects. Step 4: To lose magnetisation easily, the core must have small retentivity, so that it does not behave like a permanent magnet. Step 5: Soft iron is known to have large susceptibility and small retentivity, making it ideal for electromagnet cores. Step 6: Therefore, the correct reason is that soft iron has large magnetic susceptibility and small retentivity. Verification / Alternative check: If we used hard steel instead of soft iron, the electromagnet would retain significant magnetisation after the current is switched off, behaving more like a permanent magnet. This is desirable in devices like permanent magnets but not in switching devices or instruments where rapid control of magnetism is needed. Experimental B H curves for soft iron show steep initial rises (high susceptibility) and narrow hysteresis loops with small remanence (low retentivity). This confirms that soft iron gives strong but easily reversible magnetisation, matching the requirements of an electromagnet core. Why Other Options Are Wrong: Small magnetic susceptibility and small retentivity: This material would not magnetise strongly and would give a weak electromagnet. Large density and large retentivity: Density is not the main factor here, and large retentivity would make the core behave like a permanent magnet, which is not desired. Small density and large retentivity: Again, retentivity is too high in this case, and density does not determine magnetic behaviour directly. Common Pitfalls: Learners sometimes focus on density or mechanical strength of the core material instead of its magnetic characteristics. Another common confusion is between the needs of a permanent magnet and an electromagnet. Permanent magnets require high retentivity, while electromagnets require low retentivity for easy switching. Remember that soft iron is the standard choice for electromagnet cores precisely because it magnetises and demagnetises readily. Final Answer: The core of an electromagnet is made of soft iron because it has large magnetic susceptibility and small retentivity.

Question 18

The formation of sharp shadows of opaque objects can be explained by which fundamental property of light?

Accepted Answer

Introduction / Context: Shadows are very familiar everyday phenomena. When an opaque object is placed in the path of light, a dark region is formed behind it. In basic geometrical optics, this observation is used to introduce the idea that light travels in straight lines under ordinary conditions. This question asks which fundamental property of light is directly responsible for the formation of clear and sharp shadows when a small light source and an opaque object are used. Given Data / Assumptions: Light is travelling in a uniform medium such as air. An opaque object blocks the path of light from a source. A screen is placed behind the object to receive the light and shadow. We neglect diffraction effects and consider ideal geometrical optics. Concept / Approach: In geometrical optics, light is described as travelling along straight line paths called rays. This behaviour is known as the rectilinear propagation of light. When light rays meet an opaque object, the rays that would pass through the region behind the object are simply absent, so a shadow is formed on a screen placed there. Reflection, refraction, and total internal reflection are other important properties, but they explain phenomena such as mirrors, lenses, and optical fibres, not the basic principle of shadow formation. Therefore, rectilinear propagation is the correct property here. Step-by-Step Solution: Step 1: Imagine light rays emerging from a small source and travelling in straight lines through air. Step 2: Place an opaque object in front of the source. The rays that would otherwise travel into the region behind the object are blocked. Step 3: Place a screen behind the object. Regions where rays are blocked appear dark, forming the shadow, while other regions receive light and appear bright. Step 4: This simple picture uses the assumption that each ray moves in a straight line and does not bend around the object. Step 5: This assumption is exactly the statement of rectilinear propagation of light in a homogeneous medium. Step 6: Therefore, the basic property explaining shadow formation is rectilinear propagation of light. Verification / Alternative check: If light did not travel in straight lines, shadows would be blurred or might not form with sharp edges under simple conditions. In practice, small light sources produce sharp umbra and penumbra patterns that can be accurately predicted using straight line ray diagrams. Reflection and refraction can change the paths at boundaries, but in the region between source and object, and object and screen, the rays remain straight. Only in special cases involving diffraction around very small obstacles does light bend significantly, which is a wave effect and usually not considered in elementary shadow problems. Why Other Options Are Wrong: Reflection of light: Explains how light bounces from surfaces like mirrors but does not by itself explain the dark region behind an opaque object in a straight path. Refraction of light: Describes bending of light at interfaces of media with different refractive indices, such as air and glass, not the simple blocking that forms shadows. Total internal reflection of light: A special case of refraction that traps light within a denser medium, important for optical fibres but unrelated to ordinary shadow formation. Common Pitfalls: Learners sometimes confuse various optical terms and may pick reflection or refraction because they are common words. The key is to picture the actual setup: light source, object, and screen, all in the same medium. No mirror or lens is present, so reflection and refraction are not the main processes. Focusing on how rays travel in straight lines from the source to the screen helps you identify rectilinear propagation as the correct property. Final Answer: The formation of shadows is explained by the rectilinear propagation of light.

Question 19

Under which atmospheric condition is the air pressure at the Earth surface usually the highest?

Accepted Answer

Introduction / Context: Atmospheric pressure is the force per unit area exerted by the weight of the air column above a given point on the Earth surface. Weather patterns are strongly linked to variations in air pressure. High pressure areas are typically associated with settled, clear weather, while low pressure areas are linked to storms and clouds. This question tests your understanding of how temperature and humidity together affect air pressure at the surface. Given Data / Assumptions: We consider air masses at approximately the same altitude near the Earth surface. Four combinations of temperature and humidity are given: warm and moist, cool and dry, warm and dry, cool and moist. We use basic meteorological ideas of density and pressure. No strong vertical motion or unusual weather systems are assumed; we are thinking of typical conditions. Concept / Approach: Air pressure at a given level depends partly on the density of the air. Cooler air is denser than warm air because the molecules move more slowly and are closer together. Dry air is also denser than moist air because water vapour has a lower molecular weight than the average dry air components. Therefore, cool dry air tends to be the densest. A dense air column above a point leads to higher surface pressure. In contrast, warm and moist air is lighter and more buoyant, often associated with lower pressure and rising motion. So among the options, cool and dry air corresponds to the highest typical air pressure. Step-by-Step Solution: Step 1: Recall that pressure is related to the weight of the air column, which depends on air density. Step 2: Lower temperature tends to increase density because molecules are closer together in cooler air. Step 3: Lower humidity also increases density because water vapour is lighter than the main gases in dry air. Step 4: Combine these ideas to see that cool and dry air is denser than warm or moist air. Step 5: A denser air column above a given area exerts greater weight, leading to higher surface pressure. Step 6: Therefore, air pressure is usually highest when the air is cool and dry. Verification / Alternative check: Meteorological maps commonly show high pressure systems associated with cold, dry air masses, such as those originating in polar or continental interior regions. These areas often bring clear skies and stable weather. In contrast, warm oceans supply moist air that is less dense and frequently associated with low pressure systems and stormy weather. Everyday weather forecasts also describe anticyclones with cool dry conditions and high pressure. This real world evidence supports the conclusion that cool dry air produces the highest surface pressure. Why Other Options Are Wrong: Warm and moist air: Both warmth and moisture reduce density, so such air masses are often associated with low pressure, not high pressure. Warm and dry air: Warmth reduces density even if the air is dry, so pressure is lower than in a cool dry air mass. Cool and moist air: Cooling increases density, but added moisture reduces it. The combination does not yield as high a pressure as cool dry air. Common Pitfalls: Students may focus only on temperature or only on moisture and forget that both factors influence density. Another confusion arises from thinking that moisture always increases weight just because it is water, ignoring that water vapour molecules are lighter than nitrogen and oxygen molecules. Remember that cool conditions and dryness both contribute to higher density, and higher density in a stable atmosphere leads to higher surface pressure. Final Answer: Air pressure at the Earth surface is usually highest when the air is cool and dry.

Question 20

What is the basic physical reason for the extraordinary sparkle and brilliance of a suitably cut diamond?

Accepted Answer

Introduction / Context: Diamonds are famous for their intense sparkle and brilliant flashes of light when cut and polished properly. Jewellers take advantage of the optical properties of diamond to design cuts that maximise this effect. From the point of view of physics, this brilliance can be explained by the way light behaves inside the stone. This question focuses on which fundamental property of diamond is mainly responsible for its extraordinary sparkle. Given Data / Assumptions: We are considering a well cut, transparent diamond used in jewellery. Light enters the diamond from air and undergoes refraction and reflection inside. The options mention properties such as cleavage planes, transparency, refractive index, and hardness. We assume normal viewing conditions in air, with visible light. Concept / Approach: The key optical property here is the refractive index of diamond, which is very high compared to many other transparent materials. A high refractive index means that light slows down significantly inside the material and bends strongly at the interface. Because of this, the critical angle for total internal reflection inside diamond is small. Light entering the diamond is repeatedly totally internally reflected from the internal surfaces instead of escaping. Combined with dispersion, which separates colours, this leads to many bright flashes of light emerging from different facets, creating the well known sparkle. Thus, the very high refractive index is the fundamental reason for diamond brilliance. Step-by-Step Solution: Step 1: Recall that diamond has a refractive index of about 2.4, which is much higher than that of glass, which is around 1.5. Step 2: A higher refractive index leads to a smaller critical angle for total internal reflection at the diamond air interface. Step 3: When light enters the diamond, it is refracted and then strikes the internal surfaces at angles greater than the critical angle. Step 4: Under these conditions, total internal reflection occurs many times, trapping light inside and directing it through different facets. Step 5: Carefully chosen cut angles maximise the number of internal reflections and the amount of light that eventually emerges from the top of the stone. Step 6: Therefore, the key physical reason for the extraordinary sparkle is the very high refractive index of diamond. Verification / Alternative check: If a diamond is placed in a liquid whose refractive index is close to that of diamond, such as certain oils, its brilliance almost disappears because the contrast in refractive index is reduced and total internal reflection is lost. Similarly, glass with lower refractive index does not show the same level of sparkle even when cut in similar shapes. These observations confirm that refractive index, and not simply hardness or transparency, is the dominant factor behind the characteristic brilliance. Professional gem cutting is designed specifically around the optical behaviour that comes from the high refractive index. Why Other Options Are Wrong: Well defined cleavage planes: These refer to how the crystal breaks along certain directions and are important for cutting, but they do not directly cause sparkle. Very high transparency only: Transparency allows light to pass through, but many transparent materials are not particularly brilliant; refractive index and internal reflection are more important. Extreme hardness: Hardness makes diamond durable and resistant to scratching, which is valuable for jewellery, but it does not explain the optical brilliance. Common Pitfalls: A common mistake is to think that hardness or simple transparency is responsible for sparkle. Another confusion is to overlook the role of total internal reflection and assume that any highly polished transparent object will show the same effect. In reality, it is the combination of high refractive index and appropriate cutting that creates the unique brilliance of diamond. Remember that refractive index governs how light bends and reflects, which is central to this phenomenon. Final Answer: The basic physical reason for the extraordinary sparkle of a cut diamond is that it has a very high refractive index.

Physics Questions