Question

You run your finger along the slick side of a positively charged tape, and then observe that the tape is no longer attracted to your hand. Which of the following are not plausible explanations for this observation? Check all that apply. (1) Sodium ions (${\mathbf{Na}}^{\mathbf{+}}$) from the salt water on your skin move onto the tape, leaving the tape with a zero (or very small) net charge. (2) Electrons from the mobile electron sea in your hand move onto the tape, leaving the tape with a zero (or very small) net charge. (3) Chloride ions (${\mathbf{CI}}^{\mathbf{-}}$) from the salt water on your skin move onto the tape, leaving the tape with a zero (or very small) net charge. (4) Protons are pulled out of the nuclei of atoms in the tape and move onto your finger.

Short answer

Statement (1) is correct; sodium ions ($N{a}^{+}$)from the salt water on your skin move onto the tape, leaving the tape with a zero (or very small) net charge.

Statement (2) is correct; electronsfrom the mobile electron sea in your hand move onto the tape, leaving the tape with a zero (or very small) net charge.

Statement (4) is correct; Protons are pulled out of the nuclei of atoms in the tape and move onto your finger.

Step-by-step solution

Significance of the negative and the positive charges

The negatively charged object reduces the net charge of a positively charged object. It increases the net charge of a negatively charged object because electrons tend to move from one object to another. Still, protons cannot move and require a large amount of energy to move.

The positive and the negative charge concept gives an incorrect plausible explanation for this observation.

Determination of the incorrect plausible explanation

Statement (3) is true as the chlorine ion contains a negative charge that eventually works on reducing the net charge of the positively charged tape.

Statement (1) is false as the sodium ions are normally positively charged, that eventually increases the net charge of the positively charged tape.

Statement (2) is false as the hand works as an insulator. Hence fewer mobile charges are there, which is a trait for the conducting materials.

Statement (4) is false as a large amount of energy is required by the protons to get out from the atoms of the tape.

Thus, statements (1), (2), and (4) are not plausible explanations for this observation.