Hello, Kei,
Failure to rust or tarnish is evidence that there was no chemical change with respect to a reaction with oxygen, or other oxidant. But that evidence isn't enough to flatly state whether a chemical or physical change occurs, as is suggested by the question. The questions seems to infer a change occurred, but it wasn't due to rust or tarnish. But there isn't any information on what change actually occurred, so the best we can say is "The substance doesn't rust or tarnish," right back to where we started.
Sorry - perhaps I misunderstand the question. Is there more to the problem?
Bob
Kei R.
Our class was extremely confused by the question,,, some of my peers answered that if there was no rust, then a chemical change must have occurred to the matter to make it rust-resistant, but we arent given any context to suggest it.01/17/21