Answer:
2
Step-by-step explanation:
Hello,
Question:
Keisha solved the following equation:
4x − 2x + 8 = 6(x + 4)
Which step has an incorrect justification? (Make sure to type only the number of the step into the blank: 1, 2, 3, 4 or 5)
Correct Solution:
x − 2x + 8 = 6(x + 4)
4x + −2x + 8 = (6) (x) + (6) (4) (Distribute)
4x + −2x + 8 = 6x + 24
(4x + −2x) + (8) = 6x + 24 (Combine Like Terms)
2x + 8 = 6x + 24
2x + 8 = 6x + 24
Subtract 6x from both sides.
2x + 8 − 6x = 6x + 24 − 6x
−4x + 8 = 24
Subtract 8 from both sides.
−4x + 8 − 8 = 24 − 8
−4x = 16
-4 x -4 = 16
x = -4
Answer:
Where keisha went wrong was forgeting to subtract 6x to both sides.
Incorrrect step is #3
Answer:
There is insufficient evidence to support the claim that the mean age is greater than 50.2 years. i.e ( μ > 50.2)
Step-by-step explanation:
Given that:
The mean age of judges in Dallas is greater than 50.2 years.
If a hypothesis test is performed, then the null and the alternative hypothesis can be computed as follows:
The null hypothesis is that the mean age of the judges in Dallas is equal to 50.2
i.e
The alternative hypothesis is that the mean age of the judges in Dallas is greater than 50.2
i.e
Decision Rule: Fail to reject the null hypothesis.
The interpretation of this decision rule implies that:
There is insufficient evidence to support the claim that the mean age is greater than 50.2 years. i.e ( μ > 50.2)
Answer:
Step-by-step explanation:
10 , 9,8,7,6,5,4,3,2,1,0,-1,-2-3,-4
Hope this helps
Answer:
the front face of the barn: 78m^2
Step-by-step explanation:
look at the photo