1answer.
Ask question
Login Signup
Ask question
All categories
  • English
  • Mathematics
  • Social Studies
  • Business
  • History
  • Health
  • Geography
  • Biology
  • Physics
  • Chemistry
  • Computers and Technology
  • Arts
  • World Languages
  • Spanish
  • French
  • German
  • Advanced Placement (AP)
  • SAT
  • Medicine
  • Law
  • Engineering
Natalka [10]
3 years ago
12

Find the distance between the points R(0, 1) and S(6, 3.5). The exact distance between the two points is .

Mathematics
2 answers:
erma4kov [3.2K]3 years ago
7 0

Answer:

6.5 :)

Step-by-step explanation:

..............

AleksAgata [21]3 years ago
7 0

Answer:

the answer 6.5

........

You might be interested in
What is the square root of 12 in radical form?
Molodets [167]

Answer:

2√3 is the simplest radical form.

Step-by-step explanation:

8 0
3 years ago
Read 2 more answers
If the test for a disease is accurate 82% of the time, how often will it come back negative if a patient has the disease?
aniked [119]
Would it just be 100 - 82 = 18, so D maybe?
4 0
3 years ago
Read 2 more answers
Which is the graph of f(x) = 5(2)x?
andriy [413]

<u>A is the answer.  </u>(0,5) (2,20)

<u>Step-by-step explanation:</u>

This is the correct graph on Desmos, the other user forgot to add x as an exponent.

(0,5) (2,20)

8 0
4 years ago
Read 2 more answers
Using algebra, find the point at which the line k(x) = 5x - 1 intersects with the line h(x) = -3x - 1 ?
vichka [17]

The point at which the lines k(x) = 5x - 1 and h(x) = -3x - 1 meet is (0, -1)

Given: k(x) = 5x - 1, h(x) = -3x - 1

We need to find the point(if any) at which these two lines k and h meets.

To find point of intersection(if any), we need to set the functions equal as at the point of intersection the (x, y) value will be same for both of the lines.

Therefore, k(x) = h(x)

=> 5x - 1 = -3x - 1

=> 8x = 0

=> x = 0

k(x=0) = 5 * 0  - 1 = -1

Hence the point at which the lines k(x) = 5x - 1 and h(x) = -3x - 1 meet is (0, -1)

Know more about "point of intersection" problems here: brainly.com/question/16929168

#SPJ1

8 0
2 years ago
Prove that it is impossible to dissect a cube into finitely many cubes, no two of which are the same size.
solniwko [45]

explanation:

The sides of a cube are squares, and they are covered by the respective sides of the cubes covering that side of the big cube. If we can show that a sqaure cannot be descomposed in squares of different sides, then we are done.

We cover the bottom side of that square with the bottom side of smaller squares. Above each square there is at least one square. Those squares have different heights, and they can have more or less (but not equal) height than the square they have below.

There is one square, lets call it A, that has minimum height among the squares that cover the bottom line, a bigger sqaure cannot fit above A because it would overlap with A's neighbours, so the selected square, lets call it B, should have less height than A itself.

There should be a 'hole' between B and at least one of A's neighbours, this hole is a rectangle with height equal to B's height. Since we cant use squares of similar sizes, we need at least 2 squares covering the 'hole', or a big sqaure that will form another hole above B, making this problem inifnite. If we use 2 or more squares, those sqaures height's combined should be at least equal than the height of B. Lets call C the small square that is next to B and above A in the 'hole'. C has even less height than B (otherwise, C would form the 'hole' above B as we described before). There are 2 possibilities:

  • C has similar size than the difference between A and B
  • C has smaller size than the difference between A and B

If the second case would be true, next to C and above A there should be another 'hole', making this problem infinite. Assuming the first case is true, then C would fit perfectly above A and between B and A's neighborhood.  Leaving a small rectangle above it that was part of the original hole.

That small rectangle has base length similar than the sides of C, so it cant be covered by a single square. The small sqaure you would use to cover that rectangle that is above to C and next to B, lets call it D, would leave another 'hole' above C and between D and A's neighborhood.

As you can see, this problem recursively forces you to use smaller and smaller squares, to a never end. You cant cover a sqaure with a finite number of squares and, as a result, you cant cover a cube with finite cubes.

3 0
4 years ago
Other questions:
  • What causes a line to switch direction? Changing the slope from a whole number to a fraction. Changing the y-intercept from nega
    12·1 answer
  • what is the smallest number of degrees needed to rotate a regular Pentagon around its center onto itself?
    9·1 answer
  • The graph shows the distance Julian drives on a trip. What is Julian’s speed
    10·2 answers
  • The high school band learns 3 new songs every 2 weeks for the home football games. Write an
    14·1 answer
  • What is five-sixths of sixty
    6·2 answers
  • The polygons in each pair are similar. find the missing side length​
    5·1 answer
  • Which of the following equations results in no solutions?
    15·1 answer
  • 9. Write the equation that expresses the table below.
    8·1 answer
  • Find the slope of the graph of the equation at the given point. (If an answer is undefined, enter UNDEFINED.)
    8·1 answer
  • Plss help me quickly tyyy<br>either question 5 or six cus I need the explanation:)))​
    11·1 answer
Add answer
Login
Not registered? Fast signup
Signup
Login Signup
Ask question!