Answer:
15 4/9 inches long
Step-by-step explanation:
5 4/9 × 3
When lining them vertically the 3 ends up under 5 in which you multiply and transfer the 4/9 next to the product of 15. Hope that helped!
Answer:
first, subtract 17 on both sides: x²+2x-16=0
this cannot be factored, so use the quadratic formula to solve for x:
b²-4ac=2²-4(10(-16)=4+64=68
√68=2√17
so x=(-2+2√17)/2 or x=(-2-2√17)/2
x=-1+√17 or x=-1-√17
Step-by-step explanation:
We can simplify the expression by using exponent properties, and we will see that the correct option is the fourth option.
<h3>How to simplify the expression?</h3>
Remember the exponent property:
Here we have the expression:
We can reorder this to get:
The right side can be simplified to:
Now, we can move the decimal point one time to the left and increase the exponent by one, so we get:
Then we conclude that the correct option is the last one (where I rounded the expression to only 3 values after the decimal point).
If you want to learn more about scientific notation:
brainly.com/question/5756316
#SPJ1
Answer:
production cost f(x), in dollars, for x number of units produced by company 1:
f(x) = 0.05x^2 − 7x + 300
2) Table that represents the production cost g(x), in dollars, for x number of units produced by company 2:
x g(x)
0.6 899.58
0.8 899.52
1 899.50
1.2 899.52
1.4 899.58
3) Comparison: do a table for f(x) with the same x-values of the table for g(x).
x f(x) = 0.05x^2 − 7x + 300 g(x)
0.6 295.818 899.58
0.8 294.432 899.52
1 293.05 899.50
1.2 291.672 899.52
1.4 290.298 899.58
As you can see the values of f(x) are consistently lower than the values of g(x) for the same x-values.
The minimum production cost for company 2 is around 899.50 at x = 1, while the minimum production cost of company 1 is defintely lower (lower than 292.298 for sure, in fact if you find the vertex it is 55).
Answer: Based on the given information, the minimum production cost for company 2 is greater.
Step-by-step explanation:
