All categories

3 years ago

Use the distributive property to rewrite the expression and solve. 8 63 = 8 + 8 3 =

1 answer:

6 0

8 * 63 = 8 * ? + 8 * 3 = ?

Okay, so we have 8 * 63, and it is broken down to 8 * ? + 8 * 3.

63 - 3 = 60, so our number should be 60.

8 * 63 = 8 * 60 + 8 * 3 = ?

To find the last number, we can just multiply 8 * 63, which is 504.

8 * 63 = 8 * 60 + 8 * 3 = 504

You might be interested in

Evaluate the expression for m = 0. –11m2 − 18m + 93 =

dimulka [17.4K]

Answer:

Step-by-step explanation:

if m = 0

11m2 would equal 0

0 - 18m

18m would = 0

so 0 + 93 = 93

5 0

2 years ago

I don't understand this please help i think its A but i don't know

loris [4]

<span>B. The argument is invalid because the conclusion does not follow the premises. Hope this helps! :)
</span>

3 0

3 years ago

Read 2 more answers

Q: The ratio of the numbers of Nick's marbles to Michael's is 3:5. Nick has 36 marbles. If Nick receives

Nataly [62]

Answer:

$\frac{3}{4}$

Step-by-step explanation:

$\frac{3}{5} = \frac{36}{x}$

3x = 36 x 5

3x = 180

x = 60

Michael has 60 marbles.

Nick recieves 9 more marbles so he has 36 + 9 = 45 marbles

The new ratio will be:

$\frac{45}{60}$ = $\frac{3}{4}$

7 0

1 year ago

I need help people what is 215÷ 9

Dominik [7]

215/9 = 23.888

23 with a remainder of 8

I hope I helped

6 0

3 years ago

Read 2 more answers

Determine the type and number of solutions of −4x2 − 3x + 7 = 0.

Kaylis [27]

Answer:

Step-by-step explanation:

You have to use the discriminant for this. If the quadratic is $-4x^2-3x+7$ , then

a = -4, b = -3, and c = 7. The formula for finding the discriminant is

$D=b^2-4ac$ which comes from the quadratic formula, but without the square root sign. Filling in:

$D=(-3)^2-4(-4)(7)$ which simplifies down to

D = 9 + 112 so

D = 121. This is a perfect square, so the solutions will be 2 real. Just so you know, you will NEVER have a solution like the one offered in the third choice down. If you have one imaginary root, you will ALWAYS have a second by the conjugate rule.

7 0

2 years ago