Answer:
888+88+8+8+8=1000
Step-by-step explanation:
Answer:
If the equation is in the form, ax + b = c, where x is the variable, you can solve the equation as before. First “undo” the addition and subtraction, and then “undo” the multiplication and division. Solve 3y + 2 = 11. Subtract 2 from both sides of the equation to get the term with the variable by itself.
Hope this helps :D
Answer: The perimeter is 30ft.
Step-by-step explanation:
Let's define:
L = length of the longer side.
S = length of the shorter side.
P = perimeter
we know that for a common rectangle:
P = 2*S + 2*L
We aso know that:
L = 2ft + (1/3)*P
S = (1/10)*P
L = S + 9ft.
So we have a system, let's find the perimeter only using this system (So i will ignore the equation for the perimeter of a rectangle)
First, we can replace the third equation in the first equation, now we have a system with only two equations:
S + 9ft = 2ft + (1/3)*P
S = P/10
Now we can replace the second equation in the first equation, and get:
P/10 + 9ft = 2ft + P/3
Now let's solve this for P.
9ft - 2 ft = P/3 - P/10
7ft = P( 1/3 - 1/10) = P*( 10/30 - 3/30) = P*(7/30)
(30/7)*7ft = P = 30ft.
The perimeter is 30ft.
Answer:

Step-by-step explanation:
Let's find the slope first. It took hopt 11 months (from 5 to 16) to grow 77 trees. It means that each month he grew
trees.
At this point you can use the point-slope form and re-write the equation or, let's think about it. It's a direct proportion. If at month 5 she has 90 trees, one month earlier she had 11 less. two month earlier, 22 less. 5 month earlier, or at x = 0 (ie, our intercept!) she had 55 less trees, or 90-55 = 35 trees
The equation is then 
1.
has a horizontal asymptote at 
This means that

(for at least one of these limits)
2.
has a vertical asymptote at 
This means that
has a non-removable discontinuity at
. Since
is some rational function, there must be a factor of
in its denominator.
3.
has an
-intercept at (1, 0)
This means
.
(a) With

the second point above suggests
. The first point tells us that

In order for the limit to be 0, the denominator's degree should exceed the numerator's degree; the only way for this to happen is if
so that the linear terms vanish.
The third point tells us that

So

(b) Since

we find that
, and
and
.