Step-by-step explanation:
21:18=7:6
42:36=7:6
63:54=7:6
f + 6 = ?
Well, the answer can be pretty much any number. It all depends on what number f is. f is a variable, so you can plug in any number to replace f.
For example, if f was 5, this is what the equation would look like:
5 + 6 = 11
If f was -3, this is what the equation would look like:
-3 + 6 = 3
So, again, the answer can be anything. It depends on what f is.
Answer:
8/52
Step-by-step explanation:
There are 4 Jacks and 4 Queens in a deck of 52 cards, bumping the odds up to 8/52.
The total area of pool and border = 361 square feet.
Length of square pool = x
Length of square pool plus border = (x + 1 +1 ) = x + 2
There is 1 foot length on each side on the x length.
The other length of the square pool and border = (x + 2)
Area = (x+2)(x+2)
(x + 2)(x +2) = 361. Let A = x +2
A*A = 361
A² = 361 Take square root of both sides
A = √361
A = 19
A = x + 2 = 19
x = 19 - 2
x = 17
Area of square pool = x*x = 17*17 = 289
Area of the pool = 289 square feet.
Answer:
Tamara's example is in fact an example that represents a linear functional relationship.
- This is because the cost of baby-sitting is linearly related to the amount of hours the nany spend with the child: the more hours the nany spends with the child, the higher the cost of baby-sitting, and this relation is constant: for every extra hour the cost increases at a constant rate of $6.5.
- If we want to represent the total cost of baby-sitting in a graph, taking the variable "y" as the total cost of baby-sitting and the variable "x" as the amount of hours the nany remains with the baby, y=5+6.5x (see the graph attached).
- The relation is linear because the cost increases proportionally with the amount of hours ($6.5 per hour).
- See table attached, were you can see the increses in total cost of baby sitting (y) when the amount of hours (x) increases.