Answer:
<em><u>hope</u></em><em><u> </u></em><em><u>this</u></em><em><u> </u></em><em><u>helps</u></em><em><u> </u></em><em><u>uh</u></em><em><u>.</u></em><em><u>.</u></em><em><u>.</u></em><em><u>!</u></em><em><u>!</u></em><em><u>!</u></em>
I'm going to help
soo soo sos os sos so let me help u
Answer:
The height of the tree is 3m
Answer:
For the reasons mentioned in the explanation section, it is indeed a weak generalization:
Step-by-step explanation:
- No, there is not enough data provided on certain subjects' age, socioeconomic status, etc. that may have influenced the investing decision.
- No, the survey isn't random, the study is irregular because each has a fair probability of expressing their true beliefs, here in this query it's written they've been told individuals are given actual medication, which may have contributed to the Hawthorne studies giving incorrect outcomes.
- No, the amount isn't sufficient mostly on the premise of 28 subject areas with be provided oxytocin, and therefore only one test being performed should we not be able to determine the results to implement for certain persons including billions of populace, it would be a hurried generalization.
Given, the equation that represents the height of an object:

First, we will find the velocity of the object which is the first derivative of the height using the method of the limits

We will find the value of the function y(t) when t = 3, and when t = 3+h

Substitute y(3+h) and y(3) into the expression of the limit

Where a = 0
d) compute the instantaneous velocity at t = 3

So, the answer will be: