Questões de Vestibular UFT 2018 para Vestibular - Primeiro Semestre - Língua Portuguesa, Inglês e Matemática
Foram encontradas 8 questões
Ano: 2018
Banca:
COPESE - UFT
Órgão:
UFT
Prova:
COPESE - UFT - 2018 - UFT - Vestibular - Primeiro Semestre - Língua Portuguesa, Inglês e Matemática |
Q1399819
Inglês
Texto associado
Pluto should be reclassified as a planet, experts say
The reason Pluto lost its planet status is not valid, according
to new research from the University of Central Florida in
Orlando. In 2006, the International Astronomical Union (IAU), a
global group of astronomy experts, established a definition of a
planet that required it to "clear" its orbit, or in other words, be the
largest gravitational force in its orbit. […]
Metzger, who is lead author on the study, reviewed scientific
literature from the past 200 years and found only one publication
-- from 1802 -- that used the clearing-orbit requirement to
classify planets, and it was based on since-disproven reasoning.
"It's a sloppy definition," Metzger said of the IAU's definition.
"They didn't say what they meant by clearing their orbit. If you
take that literally, then there are no planets, because no planet
clears its orbit." […]
Metzger said that the definition of a planet should be based
on its intrinsic properties, rather than ones that can change, such
as the dynamics of a planet's orbit. "Dynamics are not constant,
they are constantly changing," Metzger said. "So, they are not
the fundamental description of a body, they are just the
occupation of a body at a current era."
Instead, Metzger recommends classifying a planet based on
if it is large enough that its gravity allows it to become spherical
in shape. "And that's not just an arbitrary definition, Metzger
said. "It turns out this is an important milestone in the evolution
of a planetary body, because apparently when it happens, it
initiates active geology in the body."
Source: University of Central Florida. "Pluto should be reclassified as a planet, experts say."
ScienceDaily, 7 September 2018. Available at:<www.sciencedaily.com/releases/2018/09/180907110422.htm>.
It is CORRECT to affirm that the main idea of the text is:
Ano: 2018
Banca:
COPESE - UFT
Órgão:
UFT
Prova:
COPESE - UFT - 2018 - UFT - Vestibular - Primeiro Semestre - Língua Portuguesa, Inglês e Matemática |
Q1399820
Inglês
Texto associado
Pluto should be reclassified as a planet, experts say
The reason Pluto lost its planet status is not valid, according
to new research from the University of Central Florida in
Orlando. In 2006, the International Astronomical Union (IAU), a
global group of astronomy experts, established a definition of a
planet that required it to "clear" its orbit, or in other words, be the
largest gravitational force in its orbit. […]
Metzger, who is lead author on the study, reviewed scientific
literature from the past 200 years and found only one publication
-- from 1802 -- that used the clearing-orbit requirement to
classify planets, and it was based on since-disproven reasoning.
"It's a sloppy definition," Metzger said of the IAU's definition.
"They didn't say what they meant by clearing their orbit. If you
take that literally, then there are no planets, because no planet
clears its orbit." […]
Metzger said that the definition of a planet should be based
on its intrinsic properties, rather than ones that can change, such
as the dynamics of a planet's orbit. "Dynamics are not constant,
they are constantly changing," Metzger said. "So, they are not
the fundamental description of a body, they are just the
occupation of a body at a current era."
Instead, Metzger recommends classifying a planet based on
if it is large enough that its gravity allows it to become spherical
in shape. "And that's not just an arbitrary definition, Metzger
said. "It turns out this is an important milestone in the evolution
of a planetary body, because apparently when it happens, it
initiates active geology in the body."
Source: University of Central Florida. "Pluto should be reclassified as a planet, experts say."
ScienceDaily, 7 September 2018. Available at:<www.sciencedaily.com/releases/2018/09/180907110422.htm>.
According to Metzger, the IAU's definition of a planet was
careless because:
Ano: 2018
Banca:
COPESE - UFT
Órgão:
UFT
Prova:
COPESE - UFT - 2018 - UFT - Vestibular - Primeiro Semestre - Língua Portuguesa, Inglês e Matemática |
Q1399821
Inglês
Texto associado
Pluto should be reclassified as a planet, experts say
The reason Pluto lost its planet status is not valid, according
to new research from the University of Central Florida in
Orlando. In 2006, the International Astronomical Union (IAU), a
global group of astronomy experts, established a definition of a
planet that required it to "clear" its orbit, or in other words, be the
largest gravitational force in its orbit. […]
Metzger, who is lead author on the study, reviewed scientific
literature from the past 200 years and found only one publication
-- from 1802 -- that used the clearing-orbit requirement to
classify planets, and it was based on since-disproven reasoning.
"It's a sloppy definition," Metzger said of the IAU's definition.
"They didn't say what they meant by clearing their orbit. If you
take that literally, then there are no planets, because no planet
clears its orbit." […]
Metzger said that the definition of a planet should be based
on its intrinsic properties, rather than ones that can change, such
as the dynamics of a planet's orbit. "Dynamics are not constant,
they are constantly changing," Metzger said. "So, they are not
the fundamental description of a body, they are just the
occupation of a body at a current era."
Instead, Metzger recommends classifying a planet based on
if it is large enough that its gravity allows it to become spherical
in shape. "And that's not just an arbitrary definition, Metzger
said. "It turns out this is an important milestone in the evolution
of a planetary body, because apparently when it happens, it
initiates active geology in the body."
Source: University of Central Florida. "Pluto should be reclassified as a planet, experts say."
ScienceDaily, 7 September 2018. Available at:<www.sciencedaily.com/releases/2018/09/180907110422.htm>.
In the title of the text, the modal verb SHOULD conveys the idea
of:
Ano: 2018
Banca:
COPESE - UFT
Órgão:
UFT
Prova:
COPESE - UFT - 2018 - UFT - Vestibular - Primeiro Semestre - Língua Portuguesa, Inglês e Matemática |
Q1399822
Inglês
The cartoon infers the idea that:
Ano: 2018
Banca:
COPESE - UFT
Órgão:
UFT
Prova:
COPESE - UFT - 2018 - UFT - Vestibular - Primeiro Semestre - Língua Portuguesa, Inglês e Matemática |
Q1399823
Inglês
Texto associado
BRAZIL: JUDGE SHUTS BORDER TO VENEZUELAN
MIGRANTS FLEEING HUNGER AND HARDSHIP
Judge says entry of immigrants suspended until
conditions for ‘humanitarian reception’ are created –
activists called it ‘absurd’
A judge in Brazil has blocked Venezuelans from entering the
border state of Roraima as local authorities harden their stance
against the flood of migrants fleeing hunger and hardship in their
home country.
Judge Helder Barreto said he had suspended the entry of
Venezuelan immigrants until the conditions for a “humanitarian
reception” are created but activists working with migrants
attacked it as “absurd”.
Sister Telma Lage from the non-profit Migration and Human
Rights Institute, which helps vulnerable migrants in Roraima’s
capital Boa Vista, said the judge had overstepped his authority. “[Venezuelans] are entering Brazil and seeking refuge
because of the vulnerable situation they find themselves in,” she
said. “What we fear is the lack of options for those near to the
border.”
Since 2015, more than 56,000 Venezuelans have sought
refuge or residency in Brazil amid continuing political turmoil and
economic collapse in their home country. […]
But the flood of migrants has severely stretched health and
education services in the poor state of Roraima.
Available at: https://www.theguardian.com/world/2018/aug/06/brazil-shuts-border-venezuelanmigrants)
According to the text it is CORRECT to affirm: