All categories

3 years ago

What integer multiplied by 12 has a product of -192?

Mathematics

1 answer:

prohojiy [21]3 years ago

4 0

Answer:

-16

Step-by-step explanation:

You don't know the number that 12 is multiplied by, so substitute x for it in the equation. then you get 12x = -192 (it has a product of -192, so you can set up an equation). Then solve for x. Divide both sides by 12, and you get x = -16, thus giving the answer to your question.

You might be interested in

Natalie picked 135 berries in 15 minutes. If she continues picking at that rate, how many total minutes will it take her to pick

Alex777 [14]

Lets focus on what we know first. Natalie can pick 135 Berries in 15 minutes. Lets find out how many berries she can pick per minute.
In order to do so, We have to divide 135 by 15.

135/15=9
This means that Natalie can pick 9 berries per minute. Given that we want her to pick 486, we will need to divide that number by 9 berries to find out how many minutes it will take to get her to that number of berries.

486/9=54

This means that it will take Natalie 54 minutes in order to pick 486 berries.

5 0

3 years ago

(2x-3)(3x+4) expand and simplify

elixir [45]

Answer:

6x² - x - 12

Step-by-step explanation:

Each term in the second factor is multiplied by each term in the first factor.

(2x - 3)(3x + 4)

= 2x(3x + 4) - 3 (3x + 4) ← distribute both parenthesis

= 6x² + 8x - 9x - 12 ← collect like terms

= 6x² - x - 12 ← in expanded form

5 0

3 years ago

Please help me answer this question

Alekssandra [29.7K]

10 divided by 200= 20

4 0

3 years ago

Read 2 more answers

What are the coordinates of point Q?

Fofino [41]

Answer:

(4, 2.5)

Step-by-step explanation:

4 0

3 years ago

Country Financial, a financial services company, uses surveys of adults age and older to determine if personal financial fitness

Yakvenalex [24]

Complete Question

Country financials, a financial services company, uses surveys of adults age 18 and older to determine if personal financial fitness is changing over time. In February 2012, a sample of 1000 adults showed 410 indicating that their financial security was more that fair. In Feb 2010, a sample of 900 adults showed 315 indicating that their financial security was more than fair.

State the hypotheses that can be used to test for a significant difference between the population proportions for the two years.

What is the sample proportion indicating that their financial security was more that fair in 2012?In 2010?

Conduct the hypothesis test and compute the p-value.At a .05 level of significance what is your conclusion?

Answer:

The null hypothesis is $H_o : p_1 = p_2$

The alternative hypothesis is $H_a : p_1 \ne p_2$

in 2012 $\r p_1 =0.41$

in 2010 $\r p_2 =0.35$

The p-value is $p-value = 0.0072$

The conclusion is

There is sufficient evidence to conclude that the proportion of those indicating that financial security is more fair in Feb 2010 is different from the proportion of those indicating that financial security is more fair in Feb 2012.

Step-by-step explanation:

From the question we are told that

The sample size in 2012 is $n_1 = 1000$

The number that indicated that their finance was more than fail is k = 410

The sample size in 2010 is $n_2 = 900$

The number that indicated that their finance was more than fail is u = 315

The level of significance is $\alpha = 0.05[/ex]The null hypothesis is [tex]H_o : p_1 = p_2$

The alternative hypothesis is $H_a : p_1 \ne p_2$

Generally the sample proportion for 2012 is mathematically represented as

$\r p_1 = \frac{k}{n_1}$

=> $\r p_1 = \frac{410}{1000}$

=> $\r p_1 =0.41$

Generally the sample proportion for 2010 is mathematically represented as

$\r p_2 = \frac{u}{n_2}$

=> $\r p_2 = \frac{315}{900}$

=> $\r p_2 =0.35$

Generally the pooled sample proportion is mathematically represented as

$\r p = \frac{k + u }{n_1 + n_2}$

=> $\r p = \frac{410 + 315 }{1000+ 900}$

=> $\r p = 0.3816$

Generally the test statistics is mathematically represented as

$z = \frac{( \r p_1 - \r p_2 ) - 0}{\sqrt{\r p (1 - \r p ) ( \frac{1}{n_1} +\frac{1}{n_2} )} }$

$z = \frac{( 0.41 -0.35 ) - 0}{\sqrt{0.3816 (1 - 0.3816 ) ( \frac{1}{1000} +\frac{1}{900} )} }$

$z = 2.688$

Generally the p- value is mathematically represented as

$p-value = 2 P(Z >2.688 )$

From the z -table

$P(Z > 2.688) = 0.0036$

$p-value = 2 *0.0036$

$p-value = 0.0072$

So from the p-value obtained we see that p-value < $\alpha$ so we reject the null hypothesis

Thus there is sufficient evidence to conclude that the proportion of financial security is more fair in Feb 2010 is different from the proportion of financial security is more fair in Feb 2012.

5 0

4 years ago