The expression: 4x² + 38x + 70 ; is a polynomial expression.
__________________________________________________________
Answer:
Rewrite the expression 10(15 – 6) using the distributive property of subtraction.
A) 10(6) – 10(15)
B) 10(9)
C) 10(6 –15)
D) 10(15) – 10(6)
Show/Hide Answer
A) 10(6) – 10(15)
Incorrect. Here a greater number would be subtracted from a lesser number, and the answer would not be a whole number. The correct answer is 10(15) – 10(6).
B) 10(9)
Incorrect. The numbers in parentheses were subtracted before the number 10 could be distributed. The correct answer is 10(15) – 10(6).
C) 10(6 –15)
Incorrect. You probably used the commutative law instead of the distributive property. The correct answer is 10(15) – 10(6).
D) 10(15) – 10(6)
Correct. The 10 is correctly distributed so that it is used to multiply the 15 and the 6 separately.
Step-by-step explanation:
Answer:
I dont know
Step-by-step explanation:
SORRRYYY
Answer:
The other side was decreased to approximately .89 times its original size, meaning it was reduced by approximately 11%
Step-by-step explanation:
We can start with the basic equation for the area of a rectangle:
l × w = a
And now express the changes described above as an equation, using "p" as the amount that the width is changed:
(l × 1.1) × (w × p) = a × .98
Now let's rearrange both of those equations to solve for a / l. Starting with the first and easiest:
w = a/l
now the second one:
1.1l × wp = 0.98a
wp = 0.98a / 1.1l
1.1 wp / 0.98 = a/l
Now with both of those equalling a/l, we can equate them:
1.1 wp / 0.98 = w
We can then divide both sides by w, eliminating it
1.1wp / 0.98w = w/w
1.1p / 0.98 = 1
And solve for p
1.1p = 0.98
p = 0.98 / 1.1
p ≈ 0.89
So the width is scaled by approximately 89%
We can double check that too. Let's multiply that by the scaled length and see if we get the two percent decrease:
.89 × 1.1 = 0.979
That should be 0.98, and we're close enough. That difference of 1/1000 is due to rounding the 0.98 / 1.1 to .89. The actual result of that fraction is 0.89090909... if we multiply that by 1.1, we get exactly .98.
Answer:
It's not possible to reach a conclusion about who will vote candidate Taylor because this is a random sample and not a population census or experiment.
Step-by-step explanation:
It is impossible to reach a conclusion about the proportion of all likely voters who plan to vote for candidate Taylor because the 1,000 likely voters in the sample represent only a small fraction of all likely voters in a large city.
