No, you got the inequalities the wrong way.
In negative numbers, it is how much lower it is than 0. For example, -22 is 22 less than 0. And -2 is 2 less than 0. Here, -22 is actually less than -2 because it is farther below 0 than -2.
You can understand this better if you graph it on a number line.
So, -12 >-15. (-15 is 3 less than -12).
-1/3 >-1.
-2>-21.
<h3>
Answer: Approximately 6.58 years old</h3>
The more accurate value is 6.57881347896059, which you can round however you need. I picked two decimal places.
==================================================
Explanation:
Let's pick a starting value of the car. It doesn't matter what the starting value, but it might help make the problem easier. Let's say A = 1000. Half of that is 1000/2 = 500.
So we want to find out how long it takes for the car's value to go from $1000 to $500 if it depreciates 10% per year.
The value of r is r = 0.10 as its the decimal form of 10%
t is the unknown number of years we want to solve for
---------------------------
y = A(1 - r)^t
500 = 1000(1 - 0.1)^t
500 = 1000(0.9)^t
1000(0.9)^t = 500
0.9^t = 500/1000
0.9^t = 0.5
log( 0.9^t ) = log( 0.5 )
t*log( 0.9 ) = log( 0.5 )
t = log( 0.5 )/log( 0.9 )
t = 6.57881347896059
Note the use of logs to help us isolate the exponent.
Answer: I think it is SAS
Step-by-step explanation:
<h3>
Answer: C) Not congruent</h3>
We have 2 pairs of congruent angles, so we can prove the triangles are similar triangles (using the AA similarity theorem). But we don't have enough information to prove them to be congruent. We would need at least one pair of sides to be congruent so we could use either AAS or ASA.
For instance, if we knew that AT = AP, then we would use AAS. If we knew that HT = MP, then we would use ASA instead. However, we don't have either bit of information like this. The triangles may or may not be congruent. We simply don't have enough information to say either way. We can't definitively say they are congruent, so we just lean toward "not congruent".
