Answer:
Eight times ten plus six times one plus two times one-tenth plus seven times one-thousandth.
Step-by-step explanation:
(8 x 10) = eight times ten
(6 x 1) = six times one
(2 x 0.1) = two times one-tenth
(7 x 0.001) = seven times one-thousandth
I am not always the best with the equations to words stuff, so please comment if I am wrong!
Hey there!
One way to do this is find all the factors of 6 and then see which pair fit the requirements.
The factors of 6 are 1, 2, 3, and 6. (Note: There can be negative factors, but I am going to leave them out since it is asking for positive integers.)
You can find them by asking if each number can go into 6.
1, 2, 3, and 6 all go into 6, while 4 and 5 do not.
The requirements we have is that they must be consecutive <u>and</u> have a product of 6.
Consecutive means right after one another.
The only numbers that fit this are 2 and 3.
2 x 3 = 6
Hope this helps!
Answer:
Step-by-step explanation:
term | Phrase
inequality | 63<8k
Expression | bc+1-(8d-4)
Equation | w^4=81
Answer:
60 students
Step-by-step explanation:
The confidence interval of a proportion is given by:
Where 'p' is the proportion of students who responded 'yes', 'z' is the z-score for a 95% confidence interval (which is known to be 1.960), and 'n' is the number of students in the sample.
If the confidence interval is from 0.584 to 0.816, then:
60 students were in the sample.
The <u><em>correct answer</em></u> is:
d) People per hour, because the dependent quantity is the people
Explanation:
In this situation, the two quantities are people and hours. These are the two things in this problem we can count or measure.
The independent variable is the one that causes a change, while the dependent variable is the one that <em>gets</em> changed. In this situation, the number of people change every hour; this means the number of people <em>gets</em> changed, which makes it the dependent variable. This means that the independent variable must be time.
Since people is dependent and time is independent, "people per hour" would be the best form of this statement.