1answer.
Ask question
Login Signup
Ask question
All categories
  • English
  • Mathematics
  • Social Studies
  • Business
  • History
  • Health
  • Geography
  • Biology
  • Physics
  • Chemistry
  • Computers and Technology
  • Arts
  • World Languages
  • Spanish
  • French
  • German
  • Advanced Placement (AP)
  • SAT
  • Medicine
  • Law
  • Engineering
barxatty [35]
3 years ago
7

What is the volume of the pyramid? 11Two-thirds cm3 43Three-fourths cm3 58One-third cm3 87One-half cm3

Mathematics
2 answers:
Reptile [31]3 years ago
5 0

Answer:c

Step-by-step explanation:

Ludmilka [50]3 years ago
4 0

Answer: C. 58 1/3 cm∧3

Just took quiz.

You might be interested in
What is 4,100 rounded to the nearest 100/hundred?
mariarad [96]

Answer:

4,000

Step-by-step explanation:

4 0
2 years ago
Omar is making a scale model of the Statue of Liberty for report on New York City. The Statue of Liberty is 305 feet tall measur
Whitepunk [10]
Well if u multiply 305feet by 1/100 in your calculator you'll get 3.05ft tall
7 0
3 years ago
"assume that s is a non-empty set of real numbers which is bounded above and lambda is the least upper bound. Prove that for all
s2008m [1.1K]

By definition, if \lambda is the least upper bound of the set S, it means two thing:

  • \forall x \in S,\ x \leq \lambda
  • \forall \varepsilon>0,\ \exists x \in S:\ x>\lambda-\varepsilon

In other words, the least upper bound of a set is greater than or equal to every single element of the set, but it is "close enough" to the elements of the set, because you guaranteed to find elements in the set between \lambda-\varepsilon and \lambda

For example, pick S = [1,10). Obvisouly, the least upper bound is \lambda = 10. In fact, every number in [1,10) is smaller than 10, but as soon as you take away something from 10, say 0.01, you get 9.99, and there are elements in S greater than 9.99, say 9.9999.

So, the claim is basically proven by definition: if \beta < \lambda, let 0 < \delta = \lambda - \beta. By definition, there exists \alpha \in S:\ \alpha > \lambda - \delta.

8 0
3 years ago
Solve 4(x - 3) - 2(x - 1) &gt; 0.
Juliette [100K]

Remark

Remove the brackets. Then solve as a normal inequality.

Solution

4(x - 3) - 2(x - 1) > 0

4x - 12 - 2x + 2 > 0    Combine like terms on the left

4x - 2x - 12 + 2 > 0

2x - 10 > 0                 Add 10 to both sides

2x > 10                       Divide by 2

x > 10/2

x > 5

Answer: B

Discussion

C and D are both true but these questions always assume that you are going to pick the lowest value that will allow the inequality  to be true. x> 7 and x>14 will be included in x>5

4 0
3 years ago
40+30+45+50+23+7+15+6+4+10=?
Sergeu [11.5K]

The answer is 230. Good luck

7 0
3 years ago
Read 2 more answers
Other questions:
  • Find X such that f(x)=0 for f(x)= -2x^2-x
    14·1 answer
  • WILL MARK BRAINLIST!! Olivia rolls two fair number cubes numbered from 1 to 6. She first defines the sample space as shown below
    11·2 answers
  • True or false?
    7·1 answer
  • Help me please,Thanks
    11·1 answer
  • Can you help me solve this?​
    7·2 answers
  • AC=CE and D is the midpoint of CE. If CE = 10x+18 DE = 7x-1 and BC = 9x-3 find AB
    7·1 answer
  • Y = 1.5x + 1<br> y = -0.25x - 6<br><br> please explain how you got your answer. thank you!
    14·1 answer
  • Tierra rode in a bike-a-thon. Her sponsors donated $7 for every 5 miles she biked. At the end of the bike-a-thon, Tierra had rai
    8·1 answer
  • Pls help! I need the slope, I can plot the points!
    10·2 answers
  • The graphus buscou have the same shape. What is the equation of the grand
    10·1 answer
Add answer
Login
Not registered? Fast signup
Signup
Login Signup
Ask question!