It has been about 10 years since the BP oil spill that rocked the Gulf of Mexico. BP has launched a number of campaigns to reest
1 answer:
You might be interested in
Solving a linear inequality is comparable to solving a linear equation because the goals of both are the same, namely to obtain the <u>variable alone</u>.
The right answer, option D, is The Barbara equation<u> did not take</u> into account the number of bottles of water.
<h2>Given:</h2>The cost of a bottle of iced tea is $1.49.
The cost of a bottle of water is $1.25.
<h3>Barbara created the equation:</h3>In this question, Barbara multiplies the bottle's selling price by the number of bottles using the coefficient x.
However, she d<u>id not apply</u> any coefficient to the bottle of water.
The right equation is:</h3>
where y is the number of water bottles sold to make a $100 profit.
As a result, the right answer is that the Barbara calculation<u> did not take</u> into account the number of bottles of water.
For more information about linear equations, refer below:
Answer:
Where C is a constant, now using the initial condition we got:
And solving for C we got:
And the function desired for the advertising revenue would be given by:
With f the amount in billions and the the years since 2002 to 2006.
Explanation:
For this case we have the following function who represent the revenue grew rate:
And we want to calculate the Advertising revenue so we need to integrate the function r(t) and we can use the inidital condition t=0 , f(2)= 5.9 billion.
If we integrate the function we got:
Where C is a constant, now using the initial condition we got:
And solving for C we got:
And the function desired for the advertising revenue would be given by:
With f the amount in billions and the the years since 2002 to 2006.