Form Ca 114: Fill & Download for Free

Update: my original answer was not complete at all, so below, please accept my updated answer, which accounts for issues raised by John Sisson, Roger Chamberlain, and Tran Nguyen:Human binocular vision covers about 114 degrees horizontally and 135 degrees vertically. So to see the whole Milky Way with human stereoscopic vision at once, from the side of the disk, oriented horizontally relative to your head, you'd need to zoom out until the whole disc, 1 x 10^18 km wide, fit inside your field of stereoscopic vision horizontally. At that point, the visible disk will form the base of an isosceles triangle with a central angle of 114 degrees and the two equal-length lines running tangent to the "circle" of the galactic disk. (Triangle ABV below)This situation also gives us a quadrangle ACBV with the angles shown above.V is for viewer, C is for galactic center.We want to know distance CV.We can figure out length CV, because triangle ACV is a right triangle and we know all its angles, PLUS we know length AC is the galactic radius: 5 x 10^17 km.Therefore to calculate length CV, we can use any of the three basic trigonometric functions sin, cos, tan. If we use sin, we'll refer to mnemonic rule SOH CAH TOA to see that the sin function works on the angle Opposite the known length and gives the ratio of the known length to the Hypotenuse.So:sin 57 = CA/CVsin 57 = (5 x 10^17 km) / CV0.839 = (5 x 10^17 km) / CVCV = (5 x 10^17 km) / 0.839CV = 5.959 x 10^17 kmor about 63,000 light years.Now, since you start out from Earth, you don't actually have to travel 63,000 light years... you're already 27,000 light years from the galactic center, so you just need to go another 36,000 light years out from the center. Easy peasy!But since your field of stereoscopic vision is actually wider in the vertical dimension, you could simply rotate your head until the Milky Way disk was vertical relative to your head. This would mean you only have to zoom out from galactic center until the disk is visible inside that 135 degree vertical arc of stereoscopic vision you have in the vertical direction. That means you don't have to zoom out as far.sin 67.5 = CA/CVsin 67.5 = (5 x 10^17 km) / CV0.92388 = (5 x 10^17 km) / CVCV = (5 x 10^17 km) / 0.92388CV = 5.412 x 10^17 kmor 541,200,000,000,000,000 kmor about 57,200 light years from galactic center, or 30,200 light years from earth away from galactic center.Now, if you want to see the whole disk from above/below the galactic center, so that you see a circular figure, you'll need to fit the whole circle in your field of stereoscopic vision, so you will need to go out until it fits in your view horizontally. At that point, you'll be the vertex of an isosceles triangle with base width 10^18 km and vertex angle 114 degrees. The height of this triangle?tan 57 = (5 x 10^17 km) / CV1.54 = (5 x 10^17 km) / CVCV = (5 x 10^17 km) / 1.54CV = 3.247 x 10^17 kmor about 34,300 light years straight "up" (or "down") from galactic center.

The question is, “What is the factor that affects a solid solution?” Based on a question comment, it is particularly about why two minerals (albite and anorthite) form a solid solution, but two others (albite and microcline) do not.Solid solutions can form between two materials that have the same crystal structure and nearly the same one material can substitute for another without too much strain as the 3D material grows. When the two materials are very different, then they separate into different phases instead of a solutionAlbite and anorthite are end members of a solid solution series. See Plagioclase - Wikipedia. The Albite formula is NaAlSi3O8. The anorthite formula is CaAl2Si2O8. The Na and Ca can substitute for each other, and Al and Si can substitute for each other in the triclinic crystal structure.Microcline has a similar formula (KAlSi3O8) and also has a triclinic crystal structure.I think the reason that K doesn’t substitute for Na and Ca in the Plagioclase series is its larger ionic radius. Ionic radius - Wikipedia gives 116pm for Na, 114 pm for Ca and 152 pm for Ca. To check this, you should look up the unit cells for albite and microcline. If my explanation is right, the cell dimensions will be significantly different. Angles may also be different.

When I think of this question. One Aussie name comes in my mind is George john bailey .The man from Tasmania is surely a smiling aussie but when it comes to aussie batting what comes in our mind consistency of Steve Smith , power hitting of David Warner.But Bailey has been a crucual contributar in australian team. He has average of 41.28 in odiGeorge bailey 90 odi 3044 runs average 41David warner 106 odi 4343 runs average 43Pretty close but Bailey he has always been shadowed by other batsman.In 2012, Bailey made his T20I debut and became the second Australian after Dave Gregory to lead in his very first international match. This, without doubt, exemplified the trust CA had on the right-hander. When it comes to ODIs, he always filled in form regular skipper, Michael Clarke. At that point Clarke was battling a persistent back injury, which ruled him out of multiple limited-overs series. He brought awesome players like glen maxwell and james Faulkner .It was under his able leadership that Kings XI Punjab (KXIP) played their maiden IPL final, in 2014.Wriddhiman Saha, Akshar Patel and Mandeep Singh got a call for the national team after a successful run post-IPL 2014 and they will believe that Bailey had a role to play in their selection. The same holds for Maxwell and David Miller as well.As a captain of Australia Bailey won 5 series out of 9 and one was tie and 16 matches out of 29 in odi and lost just 10.A TTweet from alyssa healy about groege baileyAlways a man with bad luckIan Chappell has time and again slammed Bailey’s credentials. He took a jibe at him on his T20 selection in 2012: “When you are fitting George Bailey in and one of David Hussey, Glenn Maxwell or Cameron White is going to miss out, three pretty dynamic middle-order players, it's a mistake and it's a handicap for Australia”, stated Chappell.Best find in middle since 2012See his performance at no. 4See his performance at no. 5But he has been always overshadowed by players like Michel Clarke, Mike Hussey, Steve Smith, Shane Watson, David Warner .Always a great manAnd my personal, favorite innings of him against india When he slammed 156 of just 114 balls..... He leads from the front