All categories

3 years ago

Can some help on these 2

Mathematics

1 answer:

Neporo4naja [7]3 years ago

7 0

I'll help with number 5 since number 4 is a bit too small and squished to read.

Check out the attached image below for the full two-column proof. The added entries are in red.

The given statement is basically what the teacher shows at the top of the problem, which is the fact that angle 5 and angle 2 are congruent. You just repeat this statement.

The reason for statement 2 is that angle 2 and angle 4 are vertical angles. They are opposite angles formed by a pair of intersecting lines. This is the vertical angle theorem at work. We'll use the vertical angle theorem again for statement 4 when we say that angle 5 and angle 8 are the same measure.

The transitive property comes into play when we connect angles 2, 5, and 4 together, which helps us get line 3. We also connect angles 4, 5 and 8 together to get the last line, which is why the reason for statement 5 is "transitive property"

You might be interested in

Explain why the following quotient is incorrect: <br><img src="https://tex.z-dn.net/?f=1%2C000%20%5Cdiv%205%20%3D%202%2C000" id=

vitfil [10]

Answer:

When you divide a positive number (such as 1,000) by a number greater than 1 (such as 5), the answer must be smaller than the number you started with. The answer must be smaller than 1,000. 2,000 is greater than 1,000, so it cannot be correct. The correct quotient is 1,000/5 = 200.

3 0

3 years ago

What is the answer for 14x divided by 7x

Neporo4naja [7]

Answer:

Step-by-step explanation:

You're dividing 14 multiplied by a number by 7 multiplied by a number. So you'd get 2 multiplied by a number.

8 0

3 years ago

I need help I'm stuck

Yuliya22 [10]

2/7.
2/7 + 5/7 =1 Just add the numerator if the denominator is the same

5 0

2 years ago

Read 2 more answers

Let f(x,y,z) = ztan-1(y2) i + z3ln(x2 + 1) j + z k. find the flux of f across the part of the paraboloid x2 + y2 + z = 3 that li

Sophie [7]

Consider the closed region $V$ bounded simultaneously by the paraboloid and plane, jointly denoted $S$ . By the divergence theorem,

$\displaystyle\iint_S\mathbf f(x,y,z)\cdot\mathrm dS=\iiint_V\nabla\cdot\mathbf f(x,y,z)\,\mathrm dV$

And since we have

$\nabla\cdot\mathbf f(x,y,z)=1$

the volume integral will be much easier to compute. Converting to cylindrical coordinates, we have

$\displaystyle\iiint_V\nabla\cdot\mathbf f(x,y,z)\,\mathrm dV=\iiint_V\mathrm dV$
$=\displaystyle\int_{\theta=0}^{\theta=2\pi}\int_{r=0}^{r=1}\int_{z=2}^{z=3-r^2}r\,\mathrm dz\,\mathrm dr\,\mathrm d\theta$
$=\displaystyle2\pi\int_{r=0}^{r=1}r(3-r^2-2)\,\mathrm dr$
$=\dfrac\pi2$

Then the integral over the paraboloid would be the difference of the integral over the total surface and the integral over the disk. Denoting the disk by $D$ , we have

$\displaystyle\iint_{S-D}\mathbf f\cdot\mathrm dS=\frac\pi2-\iint_D\mathbf f\cdot\mathrm dS$

Parameterize $D$ by

$\mathbf s(u,v)=u\cos v\,\mathbf i+u\sin v\,\mathbf j+2\,\mathbf k$
$\implies\mathbf s_u\times\mathbf s_v=u\,\mathbf k$

which would give a unit normal vector of $\mathbf k$ . However, the divergence theorem requires that the closed surface $S$ be oriented with outward-pointing normal vectors, which means we should instead use $\mathbf s_v\times\mathbf s_u=-u\,\mathbf k$ .

Now,

$\displaystyle\iint_D\mathbf f\cdot\mathrm dS=\int_{u=0}^{u=1}\int_{v=0}^{v=2\pi}\mathbf f(x(u,v),y(u,v),z(u,v))\cdot(-u\,\mathbf k)\,\mathrm dv\,\mathrm du$
$=\displaystyle-4\pi\int_{u=0}^{u=1}u\,\mathrm du$
$=-2\pi$

So, the flux over the paraboloid alone is

$\displaystyle\iint_{S-D}\mathbf f\cdot\mathrm dS=\frac\pi2-(-2\pi)=\dfrac{5\pi}2$

6 0

3 years ago

3<br><img src="https://tex.z-dn.net/?f=3%20%2B%204%20%3D%20x%20-%201%20" id="TexFormula1" title="3 + 4 = x - 1 " alt="3 + 4 = x

Nostrana [21]

8 is the answer I got when I did the equation

5 0

2 years ago

Read 2 more answers