Answer:
f(-3) = 16
Step-by-step explanation:
You substitute -3 to x.
f(-3) = 2(-3)² - 5(-3) - 17
f(-3) = 16.
As for the coordinates, the coordinates plotted in the graph above are (1,-1) and (2,-2).
First, we have to realize that this is factored form, so we have to put this in standard quadratic form using FOIL, which is a rule mandating how we multiply the numbers here. F stands for First, which means the first number inside the parentheses for both of them, then O means the first number in the first quantity(fancy word for parentheses) multiplied by the last number of the second quantity, and so forth. When you are done, you combine like terms
anyway, you end up with x²-12x-189, but you have to inverse all numbers because of the parentheses in front, so it becomes -x²+12x+189.
Now you can find the axis of symmetry uisng the equation -b=2a (oh yeah, I forgot to mention: the standard quadratic form is a(x)²+b(x)+c already). So you do -12 / -2, which then becomes 6.
The axis of symmetry is 6
270° clockwise rotation & 90° counterclockwise rotation
Answer: First of all, we will add the options.
A. Yes, because 3 inches falls above the maximum value of lengths in the sample.
B. Yes, because the regression equation is based on a random sample.
C. Yes, because the association between length and weight is positive.
D. No, because 3 inches falls above the maximum value of lengths in the sample.
E. No, because there may not be any 3-inch fish of this species in the pond.
The correct option is D.
Step-by-step explanation: It would not be appropriate to use the model to predict the weight of species that is 3 inches long because 3 inches falls above the maximum value of lengths in the sample.
As we can see from the question, the model only accounts for species that are within the range of 0.75 to 1.35 inches in length, and species smaller or larger than that length have not been taken into consideration. Therefore the model can not be used to predict the weights of fishes not with the range accounted for.
