Answer:
B. 3n
Step-by-step explanation:
n + n + n = 3n
<u>-</u><u>-</u><u>-</u><u>-</u><u>-</u><u>-</u><u>-</u><u>-</u><u>-</u><u>-</u><u>-</u><u>-</u><u>-</u><u>-</u><u>-</u><u>-</u><u>-</u><u>-</u><u>-</u><u>-</u><u>-</u><u>-</u><u>-</u><u>-</u><u>-</u><u>-</u><u>-</u><u>-</u><u>-</u><u>-</u><u>-</u><u>-</u><u>-</u><u>-</u><u>-</u><u>-</u><u>-</u><u>-</u><u>-</u><u>-</u><u>-</u><u>-</u>
<u>3n</u> = n + n + n
#IhopeThisHelp
Answer:
if you are evaluating this claim is false
10 - 5x < 6x - 8
We can treat this inequality like a normal algebraic equation.
<em><u>Add 5x to both sides</u></em>
10 < 11x - 8
<em><u>Add 8 to both sides</u></em>
18 < 11x
<em><u>Divide both sides by 11</u></em>
1.64 < x
X is greater than the value 1.64.
Let's plug the number 2 into each value of x to verify.
10 - 5x < 6x - 8
10 - 5*2) < (6 * 2) - 8
10 - 10 < 12 - 8
0 < 4
It's correct.
Now let's plug 1, which is less than 1.64.
10 - 5x < 6x - 8
10 - 5 < 6 - 8
5 < -2
This is not correct, which means that our answer was correct.
Answer: Yes, because remember there is 2 lengths and widths so x times 2 is 2x and x - 5 times 2 is 2x - 10, so 2x + 2x -10 = 4x -10, so it would be a reasonable answer.
Step-by-step explanation: Hope this helps! :)
