Answer:
1) Part A)
Liters Mililiters
1 1,000
5 5,000
8 8,000
14 14,000
2) Part B)
One way to convert 4.2 liters to milliliters is to <u> multiply </u> the number of liters by the number of milliliters in 1 liter. This means there are <u> 4,200 </u>milliliters in 4.2 liters. The cafeteria has the greatest amount of <u> orange </u>juice, the second greatest amount of <u> grape </u> juice, and the least amount of <u> cranberry </u>juice.
Explanation:
<u>1) Data:</u>
- Grape juice: 8,000 mililiters
- Cranberry juice: 4.2 liter
- Orange juice: 12,000 mililiters
- There are 1,000 mililiers in 1 liter
<u>2) Part A:</u>
<u>Table:</u>
The table is garbled. This is what the tables could look like:
Liters Mililiters
1 1,000
5 5,000
8 8,000
14 14,000
You can see that the table shows a direct relationship between the number of mililiters and the number of liters:
- 1,000/1 = 1,000
- 5,000/5 = 1,000
- 8,000/8 = 1,000
- number of mililiters / liters = 1,000
<u>3) Part B)</u>
Fill in the blanks to explain how Landon can convert 4.2 liters of cranberry juice to mililiters so he can compare the amounts of the different juices:
i) One way to convert 4.2 liters to milliliters is to <u> multiply </u> the number of
liters by the number of milliliters in 1 liter.
- As demonstrated above there is a direct relationship between the number of mililiters and the number on liters, then you must multiply the number of liters by the proportionality constant to find the number of mililiters.
ii) This means there are <u> 4,200 </u>milliliters in 4.2 liters.
- That is the product 4.2 × 1,000 = 4,200.
iii) The cafeteria has the greatest amount of <u> orange </u>juice, the second greatest amount of <u> grape </u> juice, and the least amount of <u> cranberry </u>juice.
Rank the amounts:
↑ ↑ ↑
orange grape cranberry
Answer: x= -6 x=6
Step-by-step explanation:
expand the equation so you get (x-6)(x+6) and then set the equal to zero and solve
In accordance with <em>propositional</em> logic, <em>quantifier</em> theory and definitions of <em>simple</em> and <em>composite</em> propositions, the negation of a implication has the following equivalence:
(Correct choice: iii)
<h3>How to find the equivalent form of a proposition</h3>
Herein we have a <em>composite</em> proposition, that is, the union of <em>monary</em> and <em>binary</em> operators and <em>simple</em> propositions. According to <em>propositional</em> logic and <em>quantifier</em> theory, the negation of an implication is equivalent to:
To learn more on propositions: brainly.com/question/14789062
#SPJ1
Answer:
The answer is c
Step-by-step explanation:
The given equations are

(1)

(2)
When t=0, obtain

Obtain derivatives of (1) and find x'(0).
x' (t+1) + x - 4√x - 4t*[(1/2)*1/√x = 0
x' (t+1) + x - 4√x -27/√x = 0
When t=0, obtain
x'(0) + x(0) - 4√x(0) = 0
x'(0) + 9 - 4*3 = 0
x'(0) = 3
Here, x' means

.
Obtain the derivative of (2) and find y'(0).
2y' + 4*(3/2)*(√y)*(y') = 3t² + 1
When t=0, obtain
2y'(0) +6√y(0) * y'(0) = 1
2y'(0) = 1
y'(0) = 1/2.
Here, y' means

.
Because

, obtain

Answer:
The slope of the curve at t=0 is 1/6.