Answer:
1. 4in wide
2. 5in tall
3. 10/6in (Equal to 1 4/6in)
4. 1in
5. 1in
I'm pretty sure these answers are right. Hopefully this helped. :)
Answer:
Step-by-step explanation:
The equation of a quadratic function in vertex form is given by:
Where (h,k) is the vertex.
It was given in the question that the vertex of the parabola is (-1,4).
When we substitute the vertex into the formula we get:
The parabola also passes through (4,19) hence it must satisfy its equation.
We divide both sides by 25 to get:
Hence the quadratic function is:
Answer: A
Factor the denominator, set each term equal to zero and solve for the values of x that should be excluded.
Answer:
The proof contains a simple direct proof, wrapped inside the unnecessary logical packaging of a proof by contradiction framework.
Step-by-step explanation:
The proof is rigourous and well written, so we discard the second answer.
This is not a fake proof by contradiction: it does not have any logical fallacies (circular arguments) or additional assumptions, like, for example, the "proof" of "All the horses are the same color". It is factually correct, but it can be rewritten as a direct proof.
A meaningful proof by contradiction depends strongly on the assumption that the statement to prove is false. In this argument, we only this assumption once, thus it is innecessary. Other proofs by contradiction, like the proof of "The square root of 2 is irrational" or Euclid's proof of the infinitude of primes, develop a longer argument based on the new assumption, but this proof doesn't.
To rewrite this without the superfluous framework, erase the parts "Suppose that the statement is false" and "The fact that the statement is true contradicts the assumption that the statement is false. Thus, the assumption that the statement was false must have been false. Thus, the statement is true."
