Answer:
I believe the answer would be 4
Step-by-step explanation:
I'm going to use (a) to represent the side length in my explanation. side length is equivalent to the square root of the surface area over 6. The 6 is coming from there being 6 faces on a cube. So to solve this equation, you would first write it out. a=96/6. Next you would divide 96/6, giving you 16. and then lastly, you would find the square root of 16, which is 4. giving you a final answer of 4.
Hope this helps, and you understand it more!
I believe is C and D because
C. The original rectangle width is 2m and the length is 4m. And to make the other rectangle they are adding .5 m to both the width and length
D. The original rectangle has a width of 2m and length of 4m. To make the other rectangle they are substracting 1 m from the width and length
Answer:
a 0
b) 0.9
c) 0.85
d) 0.25
e) 0.1
f) 0.0375
Step-by-step explanation:
a)
As A and B are two disjoints events, then P(A and B) is
P(A and B)=0
b)
As A and B are two disjoints events, then P(A or B) is
P(A or B)=P(A)+P(B)
P(A or B)=0.15+0.75=0.9
c)
P(not A)=1-P(A)
P(not A)=1-0.15=0.85
d)
P(not B)=1-P(B)
P(not B)=1-0.75=0.25
e)
P(not (A or B))=1-P(A or B)
P(not (A or B))=1-0.9=0.1
f)
P(A and (not B))=P(A)*P(not B)
P(A and (not B))=0.15*0.25=0.0375
Answer:
B. The contradiction of the statement is proven false, so the original
statement is therefore proven true.
Step-by-step explanation:
We assume the opposite and then get to a point where we get a false statement. That proves that the the opposite of the opposite ( what we originally wanted to prove) is true.
<u>Answer:</u>
x = 4 (extraneous solution)
<u>Step-by-step explanation:</u>
This solution is extraneous. Reason being that even if it can be solved algebraically, it is still not a valid solution because if we substitute back 
, we will get two fractions with zero denominator which would be undefined.
