Answer:
She used inductive reasoning. (False)
She used the law of detachment. (True)
Her conclusion is valid. (True)
The statements can be represented as "if p, then q and if q, then r." (False)
Her conclusion is true. (True)
Step-by-step explanation:
p = Two lines are perpendicular
q = They intersect at Right angles.
Given: A and B are perpendicular
Conclusion: A and B intersect at right angle.
According to the law of detachment, There are two premises (statements that are accepted as true) and a conclusion. They must follow the pattern as shown below.
Statement 1: If p, then q.
Statement 2: p
Conclusion: q
In our case the pattern is followed. The truth of the premises logically guarantees the truth of the conclusion. So her conclusion is true and valid.
I don't know kid I'm busy right now
Answer:
i dont know math stinks
Step-by-step explanation:
Easy example that shows

:
Let

.
Then

.
So

, or

, and so

.
The basic idea is to find the period of the repeating decimal, move the

digits belonging to one period over to the left of the decimal point by multiplying by

, then subtract the original repeating decimal from this new number, and finally divide by

.
A slightly more complicated example:
Let

.
Then

.
Then

, or
Let the bushels of wheat is b and weight of the wheat is w.
We can say that more the bushels of wheat more will be the weight of the wheat.
Hence, the quantities vary directly.
Therefore, we have
, where k is the constant of variation.
Now, we have been given that 5 bushels of wheat weigh 136 kg. Thus, we have

Thus, the constant of variation is 
Now, we have been given 3.5 bushels of wheat. Hence, we have

Therefore, 3.5 bushels of wheat weigh 95.2 kg