What could be a reason that rocks at the bottom of Mini Mountain are less eroded than those at the bottom of Monster Mountain?
Understand the Problem
The question is asking for a potential reason that explains the difference in the erosion levels of rocks at the bottoms of two different mountains, Mini Mountain and Monster Mountain. It provides four multiple choice answers, and we need to consider which answer logically explains the observed phenomenon regarding erosion.
Answer
Mini Mountain possibly has less weathering and erosion.
The rocks at the bottom of Mini Mountain might be less eroded than those at the bottom of Monster Mountain because Mini Mountain could experience less severe weathering and erosion due to factors like vegetation protection, less severe climatic conditions, or differences in rock composition.
Answer for screen readers
The rocks at the bottom of Mini Mountain might be less eroded than those at the bottom of Monster Mountain because Mini Mountain could experience less severe weathering and erosion due to factors like vegetation protection, less severe climatic conditions, or differences in rock composition.
More Information
Weathering and erosion are natural processes that break down rocks. Different factors such as vegetation, climate, and rock composition can influence how much a rock is eroded. In this case, Mini Mountain might be more protected from these factors than Monster Mountain.
Tips
A common mistake is assuming that all rocks undergo the same rate of erosion without considering environmental and geological differences that may affect erosion rates between two locations.
Sources
- Birth of Rocks - Science | 72 plays - Quizizz - quizizz.com
- Mystery Science - Will a mountain last forever? - mysteryscience.com
- Alessandra recently learned that mountain rocks can break - gauthmath.com
AI-generated content may contain errors. Please verify critical information
