Calculating mass of inner core in Kg when i only have the density

AI Thread Summary
To calculate the mass of the Earth's inner core, use the formula mass = density x volume. With a density of 14.5 x 10³ kg/m³ and a radius of 1221 km, first convert the radius to meters. The volume of a sphere can be calculated using the formula V = (4/3)πr³. After calculating the volume, multiply it by the density to find the mass in kilograms, ensuring to express the final answer in scientific notation and with appropriate significant figures. This approach allows for the determination of the inner core's mass using the provided density and radius.
flower123
Messages
4
Reaction score
0

Homework Statement


SO i don't have the radius or the volume but i have an estimate of the density 14.5 10³kg m-3
Im really uncertain of the formula needed to A. get the radius without the volume and vice versa. PLEASE HELP! Thanks in advance!


Homework Equations





The Attempt at a Solution

 
Physics news on Phys.org
If density estimate is all you have, I can't think of anything. But perhaps that's not the whole question/problem?

--
 
what else would i need? Radius? The radius is 1221km sorry for the rush in my posting and leaving out the rather important bits!
 
And the total mass, or the density of the none core part, or the overall average density.
 
the question reads...

using the information calculate the mass of the Earth's core in Kg applying the equation mass= density x volume.

show all working and and include units. give answer in appropriate scientific notation and to an appropraite significant figures.

So i have used the graph provided to get the value of density for the inner core.14.5 10³kg m-3 and the radius of 1221km. SO to calculate the volume of a sphere using these values.
 
So where is the problem? You have density and radius, you don't need anything else.

--
methods
 
I don't get how to argue it. i can prove: evolution is the ability to adapt, whether it's progression or regression from some point of view, so if evolution is not constant then animal generations couldn`t stay alive for a big amount of time because when climate is changing this generations die. but they dont. so evolution is constant. but its not an argument, right? how to fing arguments when i only prove it.. analytically, i guess it called that (this is indirectly related to biology, im...
Back
Top