Answer:
315 chocolate
Step-by-step explanation:
Let Sam's chocolate be S
Let Clariss's chocolate be C
When Sam gave Clarissa 105 chocolates, Clarissa had 5 times as many chocolates as Sam.
This can be written as:
C = 5S
The sum of their chocolate is 504 i.e
S + C = 504
Now, let us determine the chocolate of Clarissa after receiving 105 chocolate from Sam. This can be obtained as follow:
S + C = 504
But: C = 5S
S + 5S = 504
6S = 504
Divide both side by 6
S = 504/6
S = 84.
C = 5S = 5 x 84 = 420
Therefore, Clarissa have 420 chocolate after receiving 105 chocolate from Sam.
Now, to know the amount of chocolate that Clarissa has at first, we simply subtract 105 from the present amount that Clarissa have. This is illustrated below:
Amount of chocolate that Clarissa has a first = 420 – 105 = 315
Therefore, Clarissa had 315 chocolate at first.
Answer:
0.375
Step-by-step explanation:
= 3/8
= 3 ÷ 8
= 0.375
Answer:
they're all rational numbers
Step-by-step explanation:
rational numbers are positive, negative, or zero integers. they can be decimals as well.
first expression = 2.449.... + 3 = 5.449 (yes, it is rational)
second expression = 8 + 0.54545454... = 8.545454... (yes, it is rational)
third expression = 6 + 4.582575... = 10.4582575... (yes, it is rational)
fourth expression = 4 + 13 = 17 (yes, it is rational)
fifth expression = 17.43... + 7 = 24.43.... (yes, it is rational)
sixth expression = 6.6332... + 5 = 11.6332 (yes, it is rational)
Answer: x-5 / x
Step-by-step explanation:
because…
One of the major advantage of the two-condition experiment has to do with interpreting the results of the study. Correct scientific methodology does not often allow an investigator to use previously acquired population data when conducting an experiment. For example, in the illustrative problem involving early speaking in children, we used a population mean value of 13.0 months. How do we really know the mean is 13.0 months? Suppose the figures were collected 3 to 5 years before performing the experiment. How do we know that infants haven’t changed over those years? And what about the conditions under which the population data were collected? Were they the same as in the experiment? Isn’t it possible that the people collecting the population data were not as motivated as the experimenter and, hence, were not as careful in collecting the data? Just how were the data collected? By being on hand at the moment that the child spoke the first word? Quite unlikely. The data probably were collected by asking parents when their children first spoke. How accurate, then, is the population mean?
