I need help I will mark brainlyest

write a story problem that can be solved by finding the sum of 506211 and 424809. then solve the problem

malfutka [58]

Raina had 506,211 paper clips. Her friend Ella had 424,809 paper clips. How many paper clips did thy have all together?

506,211+424,809=931,020

7 0

3 years ago

What is the answer???

muminat

Answer:

21, 15

Step-by-step explanation:

12+9=21

the third side of a triangle must be equal to the two other sides added up to make it possible

also 15 if you're trying to make a possible right triangle

5 0

3 years ago

A sculpture sits on a pedestal in the shape of a square prism. The side lengths of a base of the prism are 3 feet. The height of

german

Answer:

Total cost of covering the pedestal is $12.54.

Step-by-step explanation:

The pedestal is a square prism so top and bottom are of square shape.

Hence, we have here length = width

We know that the Total Surface Area of a Prism is:

$\text{Total Surface Area = } 2 (l\times w+ w \times h+ h \times l)$

Where l is length,

w is width and

h is height of prism

We know that here w = l = 3 feet

and h = 4 feet

Also, underside of pedestal is not to be covered.

The underside of pedestal is square type.

So,

$\text{Required Total Surface Area = } l\times w+ 2\times w \times h+2\times h \times l$

$\Rightarrow 3 \times 3 + 2 \times 3 \times 4 + 2 \times 3 \times 4\\\Rightarrow 9 + 24 + 24\\\Rightarrow 57\ ft^{2}$

Cost of cover per square foot = $ 0.22

Total cost of $57\ ft^{2}$ $\Rightarrow 0.22 \times 0.57 = \$12.54$

3 0

3 years ago

Rewrite the following arguments using letters to represent the terms, reduce the number of terms and put the arguments in to sta

Gwar [14]

Answer:

P2 affirms P1 and the conclusion is in the same direction.

P1--->P2--->C

This argument is valid.

Step-by-step explanation: using the syllogism rules.

Premises 1 (P1) = Some foreign emissaries are persons without diplomatic immunity,

Premises 2 (P2) = so some persons invulnerable to arrest and prosecution are foreign emissaries

Conclusion (C) = because no persons with diplomatic immunity are persons vulnerable to arrest and prosecution.

From the argument:

P1 uses "some", that means it's not "all" foreign emissaries person that does not have diplomatic immunity. This means that some other foreign emissaries have diplomatic immunity

P2 uses "some", that means it's affirms to that part of P1 which states that some foreign emissaries have diplomatic immunity.

The conclusion is valid because the part of P2 which states that some foreign emissaries are vulnerable to arrest, which affirms with P1 which states that Some foreign emissaries are persons without diplomatic immunity. That means no persons with diplomatic immunity are persons vulnerable to arrest and prosecution. This conclusion literally means that if you don't have diplomatic immunity, you are vulnerable to arrest and prosecution.

Therefore;

P2 affirms P1 and the conclusion is in the same direction.

P1--->P2--->C

This argument is valid.

5 0

3 years ago

⁴⁄₇ × ²⁄₃ Click the picture so that you can see the whole question

TEA [102]

Answer:

8/21

Step-by-step explanation:

just multiply the numerator and denominator

3 0

3 years ago