1.vertex form is
to get into vertex form, complete the square
step 1: group x terms
step 2: factor coefient in front of x^2 term
prep for next step: take 1/2 of linear (1st dgree term) and square it
,
step 3: add positive and negative of that previous number inside the parenthasees
factor perfect squaer trionmial
take out that -36 by expansion
2. factor out the 2
what 2 numbers multiply to get 12 and add to get 8?
2 and 6
3.
for
in our case
a=1, b=-7, c=-6
so and
4. remember that so
treat as a variable
[tex}16[/tex]
Answer:
to know what scale to use you divide the the highest score by the number of hozirontal line (feint/lighter drawn lines) which are 14.
so 260 ÷ 14 equals = 18.57
I then rounded the 18.57 to the nearest 10th = 20.
so the scale used is 20s
This question is in reverse (in two ways):
<span>1. The definition of an additive inverse of a number is precisely that which, when added to the number, will give a sum of zero. </span>
<span>The real problem, in certain fields, is usually to show that for all numbers in that field, there exists an additive inverse. </span>
<span>Therefore, if you tell me that you have a number, and its additive inverse, and you plan to add them together, then I can tell you in advance that the sum MUST be zero. </span>
<span>2. In your question, you use the word "difference", which does not work (unless the number is zero - 0 is an integer AND a rational number, and its additive inverse is -0 which is the same as 0 - the difference would be 0 - -0 = 0). </span>
<span>For example, given the number 3, and its additive inverse -3, if you add them, you get zero: </span>
<span>3 + (-3) = 0 </span>
<span>However, their "difference" will be 6 (or -6, depending which way you do the difference): </span>
<span>3 - (-3) = 6 </span>
<span>-3 - 3 = -6 </span>
<span>(because -3 is a number in the integers, then it has an additive inverse, also in the integers, of +3). </span>
<span>--- </span>
<span>A rational number is simply a number that can be expressed as the "ratio" of two integers. For example, the number 4/7 is the ratio of "four to seven". </span>
<span>It can be written as an endless decimal expansion </span>
<span>0.571428571428571428....(forever), but that does not change its nature, because it CAN be written as a ratio, it is "rational". </span>
<span>Integers are rational numbers as well (because you can always write 3/1, the ratio of 3 to 1, to express the integer we call "3") </span>
<span>The additive inverse of a rational number, written as a ratio, is found by simply flipping the sign of the numerator (top) </span>
<span>The additive inverse of 4/7 is -4/7 </span>
<span>and if you ADD those two numbers together, you get zero (as per the definition of "additive inverse") </span>
<span>(4/7) + (-4/7) = 0/7 = 0 </span>
<span>If you need to "prove" it, you begin by the existence of additive inverses in the integers. </span>
<span>ALL integers each have an additive inverse. </span>
<span>For example, the additive inverse of 4 is -4 </span>
<span>Next, show that this (in the integers) can be applied to the rationals in this manner: </span>
<span>(4/7) + (-4/7) = ? </span>
<span>common denominator, therefore you can factor out the denominator: </span>
<span>(4 + -4)/7 = ? </span>
<span>Inside the bracket is the sum of an integer with its additive inverse, therefore the sum is zero </span>
<span>(0)/7 = 0/7 = 0 </span>
<span>Since this is true for ALL integers, then it must also be true for ALL rational numbers.</span>
Answer: $497.40
Step-by-step explanation: $497.40
540*.06 (which is 6%)= 32.4
This is how we find the amount of taxes Benito paid
32.4+540= 572.4
You add the tax to the total of the price of the laptop.
572.4-75= 497.4
You take the total of what be paid and subtract the amount of money that he received after filling out the rebate form .