Justices use precedents in majority opinions and dissents in order to show that other cases with similar circumstances came to a similar decision.
Hi,
x + y = 350 (equation 1)
3x + 2y = 950 (equation 2)
Use Substitution Method
Isolate variable x in equation 1
x = 350 – y (equation 3)
Substitute equation 3 into equation 2
3(350 – y) + 2y = 950
1050 – 3y + 2y = 950
3y – 2y = 1050 – 950
y = 100
Substitute y = 100 into equation 1
x + 100 = 350
x = 250
Answer: 250 $3 tickets and 100 $2 tickets were sold.
Equation a^2 + b^2 = c^2
c = longest side, unknown
The answer is D.
12^2 + 10^2 = c^2
Example of use of terms:
Statement: If it is far, we take a bus.
Inverse: If it is not far, we do not take a bus.
Converse: If we take a bus, it is far.
Contrapositive: If we do not take a bus, it is not far.
We also know that
1. The inverse of the inverse is the statement itself, and similarly for converse and contrapositive.
2. Only the contrapositive is logically equivalent to the original statement.
This means that the converse and inverse are logically different from the original statement.
Now back to the given statement.
To find the original statement, we find the contrapositive of the contrapositive.
We then find the converse from the original statement, as in the example above.
Original statement
(note that in English, if it is not worth X dollars, means if it is not worth AT LEAST X dollars")
contrapositive of
<span>
"If an item is not worth five dimes, then it is not worth two quarters.”
is the negation of the converse, which become
"If an item is worth two quarters, then it is worth (at least) five dimes."
The converse of the previous statement is therefore
"If an item is worth (at least) five dimes then it is worth two quarters"
In this particular case, we can also take advantage of the fact that the contrapositive is the negation of the converse. So all we have to do is the provide the negation of each component of the contrapositive to get the converse:
"If an item is worth (at least) five dimes, then it is worth two quarters".
as before.
Note that the converse does NOT logically mean the same as the original statement.
</span>
Answer:
bald black man
Step-by-step explanation:
bald+black man, y=bbcx
