All categories

3 years ago

What is the area of the kite?

Mathematics

1 answer:

Kazeer [188]3 years ago

5 0

Multiply 4.93m by 8.5m to get 41.905m to the second power.

You do this because there are 2 identical triangles on the top. And if you put those two triangles together, you get a rectangle. The length of the rectangle is 8.5m while the width would be 4.93. Multiplying the length and width gives you the area.

Then multiply 10.2m by 8.5m to get 86.7m to the second power.

You do this because there are 2 identical triangles on the bottom. And if you put those two triangles together, you get another rectangle. The length of the rectangle is 8.5m while the width would be 10.2m. Multiplying those together gives you the area.

You then add the two areas, 41.905m to the second power and 86.7m to the second power, to get the area of the entire figure.

After adding, you get 128.605 m to the second power. That's the answer

You might be interested in

Three different sets of objects contain 4, 5, and 12 objects, respectively. How

Angelina_Jolie [31]

Answer:

$\text{B. }240}$

Step-by-step explanation:

$\binom{4}{1}\cdot\binom{5}{1}\cdot \binom{12}{1}=\boxed{\text{B. }240}}$

(Multiplying each of the numbers also yields 240)

4 0

2 years ago

2. f(x) = 3(x - 2)2 + 6<br>a. Standard Form:

Alexandra [31]

Answer:

${3x}^{2} - 4x + 10 = 0$

Step-by-step explanation:

$3(x - 2) {}^{2} + 6 \\ 3 \times x {}^{2} - 4x + {2}^{2} + 6 \\ 3x {}^{2} - 4x + 4 + 6 \\ {3x}^{2} - 4x + 10 = 0$

6 0

3 years ago

I’m need this worked out step by step by tonight

Pie

9514 1404 393

Answer:

-3 ≤ x ≤ 19/3

Step-by-step explanation:

This inequality can be resolved to a compound inequality:

-7 ≤ (3x -5)/2 ≤ 7

Multiply all parts by 2.

-14 ≤ 3x -5 ≤ 14

Add 5 to all parts.

-9 ≤ 3x ≤ 19

Divide all parts by 3.

-3 ≤ x ≤ 19/3

_____

<em>Additional comment</em>

If you subtract 7 from both sides of the given inequality, it becomes ...

|(3x -5)/2| -7 ≤ 0

Then you're looking for the values of x that bound the region where the graph is below the x-axis. Those are shown in the attachment. For graphing purposes, I find this comparison to zero works well.

For an algebraic solution, I like the compound inequality method shown above. That only works well when the inequality is of the form ...

|f(x)| < (some number) . . . . or ≤

If the inequality symbol points away from the absolute value expression, or if the (some number) expression involves the variable, then it is probably better to write the inequality in two parts with appropriate domain specifications:

|f(x)| > g(x) ⇒ f(x) > g(x) for f(x) > 0; or -f(x) > g(x) for f(x) < 0

Any solutions to these inequalities must respect their domains.

8 0

2 years ago

N a recent flu epidemic, the number of flu cases increased by 40% each week. There were 3,000 flu cases during the first week of

Anarel [89]

Answer:

2,880 people

Step-by-step explanation:

Week 1: 3,000 cases

Week 2: 0.4 * 3,000 = 1,200. 1,200 + 3,000 = 4,200

Week 3: 0.4 * 4,200 = 1,680. 1,680 + 4,200 = 5,880

5,880 - 3,000 = 2,880

8 0

3 years ago

Read 2 more answers

What is 36.993 to the nearest thousandth

finlep [7]

The next larger thousandth is 36.994 .
The next smaller thousandth is 36.992 .
Neither of those is any nearer to 36.993
than 36.993 already is.

The last '3' at the end of 36.993 is in the thousandths' place.
There is no more piece of another thousandth after it.
So 36.993 is already on a complete thousandth, and
there's no rounding required.

7 0

3 years ago