Answer:
Step-by-step explanation:
Rule for the rotation of a point 180° about the origin is,
(x, y) → (-x, -y)
Therefore, images of the points after the rotation of 180° will be,
A(2, 6) → A'(-2, -6)
B(6, 7) → B'(-6, -7)
C(5, 3) → C'(-5, -3)
D(1, 2) → D'(-1, -2)
Now we can plot these points on the graph as attached.
Given =
Two similar pyramid have base area of 12.2 cm² and 16 cm².
surface area of the larger pyramid = 56 cm²
find out the surface area of the smaller pyramid
To proof =
Let us assume that the surface area of the smaller pyramid be x.
as surface area of the larger pyramid is 56 cm²
Two similar pyramid have base area of 12.2 cm² and 16 cm².
by using ratio and proportion
we have
ratio of the base area of the pyramids : ratio of the surface area of the pyramids

x = 12.2 ×56×
by solvingthe above terms
we get
x =42.7cm²
Hence the surface area of the smaller pyramid be 42.7cm²
Hence proved
Answer:
The answer to this would be .8
Step-by-step explanation:
A tenth is only one figure, and due to the rule of "5 and above give it a shove; 4 and below let it go", this number would round to 0.8.
1- 6
2- 4
3- 2
And that’s all I can tell you? It’s decreasing so I don’t think 10 would have any stars unless if negative numbers are allowed
Answer:
The p value would be given by:
For this case since th p value is lower than the significance level of0.05 we have enough evidence to reject the null hypothesis and we can conclude that the true mean for this case is significantly different from 46.7 MPG
Step-by-step explanation:
Information given
represent the mean
represent the population standard deviation
sample size
represent the value to verify
represent the significance level for the hypothesis test.
z would represent the statistic
represent the p value
Hypothesis to test
We want to test if the true mean for this case is 46.7, the system of hypothesis would be:
Null hypothesis:
Alternative hypothesis:
Since we know the population deviation the statistic is given by:
(1)
Replacing we got:
The p value would be given by:
For this case since th p value is lower than the significance level of0.05 we have enough evidence to reject the null hypothesis and we can conclude that the true mean for this case is significantly different from 46.7 MPG