All categories

3 years ago

What is the LCM of 36 and 108?

Mathematics

2 answers:

Mrrafil [7]3 years ago

7 0

Answer:

Answer is 108

Step-by-step explanation:

See answer in above picture or attachment

Oksana_A [137]3 years ago

6 0

The least comm multiple for 36 and 108 is 108. This is because 36 is already a multiple of 108 so it will be the least common multiple between both numbers.

You might be interested in

Which of the following statements are true?

astraxan [27]

C I think the answer is

8 0

3 years ago

Read 2 more answers

HELP PLEASEEEEEEEEEEEE

Vlada [557]

Answer:

Just a tip that you can use apps on the computer called Math-way and Math papa for free (Sorry i wasn't able to answer but I tried my best) Hope This helps!

Step-by-step explanation:

3 0

2 years ago

What is the average rate of change between (3,2) and (1,9)

hjlf

Answer:

-0.25

Step-by-step explanation:

1-3= -2

9-2= 8

-2/8= -0.25

7 0

3 years ago

A system of linear equations with fewer equations than unknowns is sometimes called an underdetermined system. Can such a system

elena55 [62]

Answer:

No, it cannot have a unique solution. Because there are more variables than equations, there must be at least one free variable. If the linear system is consistent and there is at least one free variable, the solution set contains infinitely many solutions. If the linear system is inconsistent, there is no solution.

Step-by-step explanation:

the questionnaire options are incomplete, however the given option is correct

We mark this option as correct because in a linear system of equations there can be more than one solution, since the components of the equations, that is, the variables are multiple, leaving free variables which generates more alternative solutions, however when there is no consistency there will be no solution

3 0

3 years ago

Country Financial, a financial services company, uses surveys of adults age and older to determine if personal financial fitness

Yakvenalex [24]

Complete Question

Country financials, a financial services company, uses surveys of adults age 18 and older to determine if personal financial fitness is changing over time. In February 2012, a sample of 1000 adults showed 410 indicating that their financial security was more that fair. In Feb 2010, a sample of 900 adults showed 315 indicating that their financial security was more than fair.

State the hypotheses that can be used to test for a significant difference between the population proportions for the two years.

What is the sample proportion indicating that their financial security was more that fair in 2012?In 2010?

Conduct the hypothesis test and compute the p-value.At a .05 level of significance what is your conclusion?

Answer:

The null hypothesis is $H_o : p_1 = p_2$

The alternative hypothesis is $H_a : p_1 \ne p_2$

in 2012 $\r p_1 =0.41$

in 2010 $\r p_2 =0.35$

The p-value is $p-value = 0.0072$

The conclusion is

There is sufficient evidence to conclude that the proportion of those indicating that financial security is more fair in Feb 2010 is different from the proportion of those indicating that financial security is more fair in Feb 2012.

Step-by-step explanation:

From the question we are told that

The sample size in 2012 is $n_1 = 1000$

The number that indicated that their finance was more than fail is k = 410

The sample size in 2010 is $n_2 = 900$

The number that indicated that their finance was more than fail is u = 315

The level of significance is $\alpha = 0.05[/ex]The null hypothesis is [tex]H_o : p_1 = p_2$

The alternative hypothesis is $H_a : p_1 \ne p_2$

Generally the sample proportion for 2012 is mathematically represented as

$\r p_1 = \frac{k}{n_1}$

=> $\r p_1 = \frac{410}{1000}$

=> $\r p_1 =0.41$

Generally the sample proportion for 2010 is mathematically represented as

$\r p_2 = \frac{u}{n_2}$

=> $\r p_2 = \frac{315}{900}$

=> $\r p_2 =0.35$

Generally the pooled sample proportion is mathematically represented as

$\r p = \frac{k + u }{n_1 + n_2}$

=> $\r p = \frac{410 + 315 }{1000+ 900}$

=> $\r p = 0.3816$

Generally the test statistics is mathematically represented as

$z = \frac{( \r p_1 - \r p_2 ) - 0}{\sqrt{\r p (1 - \r p ) ( \frac{1}{n_1} +\frac{1}{n_2} )} }$

$z = \frac{( 0.41 -0.35 ) - 0}{\sqrt{0.3816 (1 - 0.3816 ) ( \frac{1}{1000} +\frac{1}{900} )} }$

$z = 2.688$

Generally the p- value is mathematically represented as

$p-value = 2 P(Z >2.688 )$

From the z -table

$P(Z > 2.688) = 0.0036$

$p-value = 2 *0.0036$

$p-value = 0.0072$

So from the p-value obtained we see that p-value < $\alpha$ so we reject the null hypothesis

Thus there is sufficient evidence to conclude that the proportion of financial security is more fair in Feb 2010 is different from the proportion of financial security is more fair in Feb 2012.

5 0

3 years ago