Ask question

Ask question

All categories

4 years ago

5

I really need to solve this

1 answer:

Daniel [21]4 years ago

4 0

The answer is B. You need to find a common denominator. B) 1/4 - 1/5 = 1/20. To get a common denominator, multiply 5 and 4 to get 20. The common denominator is now 20. Now you have to multiply the numerators by the opposite denominator. This gives you 5/20 - 4/20 which equals 1/20 because you are subtracting the numerators, 5 and 4.

You might be interested in

Let x, y, and z represent three rational numbers, such that y is 512 times x and z is 50.25 more than x. If y=15.5, what is the

harkovskaia [24]

Answer:

z = 50.2802734375

Step-by-step explanation:

y = 15.5

y is 512 times x

z is 50.25 more than x

15.5/512 = 0.0302734375

x = 0.0302734375

0.0302734375 + 50.25 = 50.2802734375

z = 50.2802734375

3 0

2 years ago

Pleas help me this is 9th grade math help me if you are a nice person I love you

irinina [24]

Answer:

D.) This system has no solutions (The one you chose is correct)

Step-by-step explanation:

y = 8x + 9

-8x + y = -1

-8x + y = -1

y = 8x - 1

These two lines will also never meet as the slope are both 8, but the y-intercept is different, to check, look at the graph below.

4 0

3 years ago

Read 2 more answers

The population of a city is expected to

Furkat [3]

$\huge\boxed{1.0925p}$

Since the population is going to increase by a certain percentage, we have to add $100\%$ to the percentage to keep the original population.

$9.25\%+100\%=109.25\%$

Now, convert the percentage into a decimal. You can do this by moving the decimal place two places to the left.

$109.25\longrightarrow 1.0925$

Now, just multiply that by $p$ .

$\large\boxed{1.0925p}$

8 0

3 years ago

Are they similar or no? Please help.

Troyanec [42]

Answer:

they are not similar because the ratio between its sides are different

hope it helps! :D

8 0

4 years ago

Read 2 more answers

Pls answer need help asap!!

Ivanshal [37]

The first parallelogram is parallel but the second parallelogram is not parallel

4 0

3 years ago