Answer:
B
Step-by-step explanation:
Brainliest??? plzzzz <em>L</em>(-_-)7
Answer:
Most people found the probability of just stopping at the first light and the probability of just stopping at the second light and added them together. I'm just going to show another valid way to solve this problem. You can solve these kinds of problems whichever way you prefer.
There are three possibilities we need to consider:
Being stopped at both lights
Being stopped at neither light
Being stopped at exactly one light
The sum of the probabilities of all of the events has to be 1 because there is a 100% chance that one of these possibilities has to occur, so the probability of being stopped at exactly one light is 1 minus the probability of being stopped at both lights minus the probability of being stopped at neither.
Because the lights are independent, the probability of being stopped at both lights is just the probability of being stopped at the first light times the probability of being stopped at the second light. (0.4)(0.7) = 0.28
The probability of being stopped at neither is the probability of not being stopped at the first light, which is 1-0.4 or 0.6, times the probability of not being stopped at the second light, which is 1-0.7 or 0.3. (0.6)(0.3) = 0.18
Step-by-step explanation:
Using the features, a piece-wise function is defined, and the graph is sketched at the end of this answer.
A piece-wise function is a function that has <u>multiple definitions</u>, depending on the value of the input.
He starts at 0 feet, and reaches a maximum elevation of 800 feet in 30 minutes, with a steady(linear) increase thus, for the first 30 minutes, the definition is:
For the next 5 minutes, he stops to rest, at the maximum elevation of 800 feet, thus, the definition is:
For the final 20 minutes, he descends 800 meters, at a linear rate, thus:
Using these definitions, the graph is sketched at the end of this answer.
A similar problem is given at brainly.com/question/13205719
7 - 2 = 5
5 / 5 = 1
The answer would be 1.
Answer:
A. Yes, the triangles are congruent by SAS.
Step-by-step explanation:
EF = FG and DF = FH-> Given
angle EFD = angle HFG -> Vertical angles are congruent
DE F = HGF -> SAS Triangle Congruence Theorem
