Answer:
The answer is

Step-by-step explanation:
Remember that Taylor says that

For this case


The answer: " x = 68, y = 72 " .
____________________________
Explanation:
________________________________________
46 + (x - 3) + (y - 3) = 180 .
46 + 1(x - 3) + 1(y-3) = 180 .
46 + 1x - 3 + 1y - 3 = 180 .
46 - 3 - 3 + 1x + 1y = 180 .
40 + x + y = 180 ;
Subtract "40" from EACH SIDE of the equation:
______________________________________
40 + x + y - 40 = 180 - 40 ;
to get:
x + y = 140 ;
_____________________________________
Now:
_____________________________________
65 = (x - 3) ;
↔ x - 3 = 65 ;
Add "3" to EACH SIDE of the equation;
x - 3 + 3 = 65 + 3 ;
to get:
x = 68 .
______________________________
Now:
Since: "x + y = 140" ;
Let us plug in our known value, "68" ; for "x" ;
to solve for "y" ;
__________________________________
x + y = 140 ;
68 + y = 140 ;
↔ y + 68 = 140 ;
Subtract "68" from EACH SIDE of the equation; to isolate "y" on one side of the equation; and to solve for "y" ;
______________________________________________
y + 68 - 68 = 140 = 68 ;
y = 72 .
______________________________________________
So, solve for "x" and "y".
x = 68, y = 72 .
_______________________________________________
5) The relation between intensity and current appears linear for intensity of 300 or more (current = intensity/10). For intensity of 150, current is less than that linear relation would predict. This seems to support the notion that current will go to zero for zero intensity. Current might even be negative for zero intensity since the line through the points (300, 30) and (150, 10) will have a negative intercept (-10) when current is zero.
Usually, we expect no output from a power-translating device when there is no input, so we expect current = 0 when intensity = 0.
6) We have no reason to believe the linear relation will not continue to hold for values of intensity near those already shown. We expect the current to be 100 for in intensity of 1000.
8) Apparently, times were only measured for 1, 3, 6, 8, and 12 laps. The author of the graph did not want to extrapolate beyond the data collected--a reasonable choice.
As soon as I see the word "Which ...", I know that there's a list of choices that
goes along with this question, but you decided not to share them. So there's
no way for me to help you choose the correct one.
In order to form a proportion with 3/4, you need another fraction (or ratio) that's
equal to 3/4 . Look for a fraction whose numerator is 3/4 of its denominator.
Here are a few examples:
-- 6 / 8
-- 24 / 32
-- 300 / 400
-- 12 million / 16 million
-- 3x / 4x
-- 15abc / 20abc
-- 3(x+y+z) / 4(x+y+z)