Question:
why do you suppose small-ring cycloalkenes such as
cyclohexenedon't exist as cis-trans isomers?

Cyclohexene doesn't exhibit this type of Isomerism. Cyclohexene is a tiny ring to exhibit the trans isomer. The Structural formula and component bonding characteristic within it limits it to show this phenomenon. Trying to force it to be trans would place a massive amount of ring strain on the molecule.

This characterises major rings within Alkene group up to cyclooctene.

Explanation:

that's what i got you can count the number of atoms

the correct answer is b. a strong acid completely dissociates to its ions when dissolved in water. completely dissociates to and ions. a is incorrect because does not fully ionize to and ions and some remain as the compound . c and d are incorrect because, and do not fall into the category of bronsted lowry acids. a bronsted lowry acid is a proton donor and since both molecules do not have a proton to donate they are not bronsted lowry acids. likewise,   if we use the lewis acid definition, they cannot be acids. a lewis acid is an electron pair acceptor. both and have a complete octet so can not accept any electrons which disqualifies them as acids.