All categories

3 years ago

What key features can be identified from graphs of polynomials of higher degrees?

1 answer:

4 0

Polynomials are algebraic expressions that contain more than two terms. AN example would be: f(x) = x^3 + x^2 + x +1. This equation contains three terms, with the 3rd degree as its highest term. It also means that the graph passed three x-intercepts. This depends in the highest degree. So, the first thing you do is plot the intercepts because for sure, the graph will pass there.

Hope this helps :)

You might be interested in

Disssss tooo helllllllpppp shoals shzn

iren2701 [21]

Answer:

3/2

Step-by-step explanation:

Use this formula y2-y1/x2-x1

PLUG IN YOUR POINTS

-3 - -9/ 8- 4 =

6/4 (simplify)

1.5 or 3/2

Hope this helps ya!!

7 0

3 years ago

Suppose you draw a card from a well-shuffled deck of 52 cards. Find each of the following odds.

garik1379 [7]

1) number of cards that aren't : number of cards that are 3
we have 48 cards that arent 3 and 4 cards that are. that means that odds are:
12:1 of not drawing 3

2) fallow same logic. its just opposite.
1:12

3) same logic. but there are only 2 black 7 cards which means that odds are:
50:2 or
25:1

4) opposite of previous.
1:25

6 0

3 years ago

Read 2 more answers

Differentiate: y=152+26−37 dy/dx= answer

ozzi

Answer:

$\frac{dy}{dx} y=0$

General Formulas and Concepts:

Calculus

The derivative of a constant is equal to 0

Step-by-step explanation:

Step 1: Define function

y = 152 + 26 - 37

Step 2: Simplify

Combine like terms

y = 141

Step 3: Find derivative

Derivative of any constant will be 0.

$\frac{dy}{dx} y=0$

8 0

2 years ago

I NEED HELP ASAP IM DOING IT NOW. !!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!! Lily likes to collect records. Last year she had 12 records in her col

ratelena [41]

Answer:

12/10 =1.2 - 1 = 0.2 x 100 = 20%

Step-by-step explanation:

7 0

3 years ago

Read 2 more answers

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