Which statement is evidence that the everyday use of the word law refers to rules that can be broken?
A. Speed limits are set by laws. A community decides to change its speed limit from forty to thirty five miles per hour.
B. People change their behavior in response to laws. A man decides to leave his house five minutes early each morning to allow for traffic.
C. Electricity operates under physical laws. Voltages combine in a circuit depending on the physical properties of electric fields.
D. Oxidation operates under chemical laws. An apple turns brown and oxidizes when exposed to the air
A. Speed limits are set by laws. A community decides to change its speed limit from forty to thirty-five miles per hour.
The statement that is evidence that the everyday use of the word law refers to rules that can be broken is option D. Oxidation operates under chemical laws. An apple turns brown and oxidizes when exposed to the air. This statement indicates that the law of oxidation can be broken, as the apple turns brown and undergoes a chemical change when it is exposed to the air.
To determine which statement is evidence that the everyday use of the word law refers to rules that can be broken, we need to analyze each option:
A. This statement is simply describing a community's decision to change a speed limit. It does not address the concept of rules being broken.
B. This statement indicates that people change their behavior in response to laws, but it does not specifically highlight rules being broken.
C. This statement is discussing physical laws governing electricity's behavior and does not relate to rules being broken.
D. This statement explains how oxidation in apples follows chemical laws, but it does not pertain to rules being broken either.
Based on the analysis, none of the given options provide evidence that the everyday use of the word law refers to rules that can be broken. Therefore, none of the options A, B, C, or D can be considered as evidence for this particular context.