Answer: I really do not know how to fix your problem. Maybe restart your phone?!
Answer:
11/48
Step-by-step explanation: You use KCF.
1. Keep 11/12
2. Change division to multiplication
3. Flip 4/1 to 1/4
4. Multiply 11/12 and 1/4
5. You get your answer 11/48
Given that the graph shows tha the functión at x = 0 is below the y-axis, the constant term of the function has to be negative. This leaves us two possibilities:
y = 8x^2 + 2x - 5 and y = 2x^2 + 8x - 5
To try to discard one of them, let us use the vertex, which is at x = -2.
With y = 8x^2 + 2x - 5, you get y = 8(-2)^2 + 2(-2) - 5 = 32 - 4 - 5 = 23 , which is not the y-coordinate of the vertex of the curve of the graph.
Test the other equation, y = 2x^2 + 8x - 5 = 2(-2)^2 + 8(-2) - 5 = 8 - 16 - 5 = -13, which is exactly the y-coordinate of the function graphed.
Then, the answer is 2x^2 + 8x -5
Answer:
B
Step-by-step explanation:
Given that ∠A ≅ ∠B, Evelia conjectured that ∠A and ∠B are acute angles.
Consider all options:
A. If m∠A=114° and m∠B=170°, then angles A and B are not congruent, so this is not a counterexample.
B. If m∠A=126° and m∠B=126°, then angles A and B are congruent and both these angles are obtuse (their measures are greater than 90°). This means that two obtuse angles can be congruent, so this is a counterexample. True option.
C. If m∠A=30° and m∠B=40°, then angles A and B are not congruent, so this is not a counterexample.
D. If m∠A=45° and m∠B=45°, then angles A and B are congruent, so this examples show two congruent acute angles. But if we have to prove some statement, we have to prove this statement for an arbitrary angles, not for one pair of angles. Moreover, this is an example illustrating given statement, but is not a counterexample.
