Ask question

Ask question

All categories

riadik2000 [5.3K]

3 years ago

11

Find the scale factor of the similar shapes below.

1 answer:

timofeeve [1]3 years ago

5 0

Answer:

x=12 and the scale factor is 1.5

Step-by-step explanation:

From D' to F' is 7.5 and from D to F is 5cm the difference is 2.5. From F' to E' is x and from F to E is 8. This is just understanding what you can see. You find x by figuring out the ratio from 5 to 7.5 is and 8 to x or vise versa. It depends which way you are going. I think you are going from E,D,F to E',D',F'. So from 5cm to 7.5 cm. This is 1.5 because you are dividing 7.5/5. If you needed to find x, it would be 12.

You might be interested in

If you add 1 to half of 1, then half of 1 to the previous number, and so on, will you ever get to 2?

lisov135 [29]

Answer:

no

Step-by-step explanation:

4 0

3 years ago

Read 2 more answers

Please help. It’s a picture

Korolek [52]

$260

I don’t know what model/formula you are supposed to be using.

But what I did first was calculated what 30% of 2700$ is.
2700 x .3 = 810

So it depreciates $810 per year.

$810 x. 3 years = 2430

2700 - 2430 = 260

In three years, the laptop will be worth $260

6 0

3 years ago

I WILL MARK YOU BRAINLIEST!I REALLY NEED HELP WITH 20 PLEASE HELP ME

Finger [1]

Answer:

AP is 11.25 so the answer is F

Step-by-step explanation:

Since they are similar triangles (due to the ~ symbol)

You can write this:

AC/XZ = AP/XQ

since XZ=12

XQ=5

AC=27

you can write:

27/12=AP/5

then cross multiply:

27x5=135

135/12=11.25

AP is 11.25

6 0

3 years ago

All help is appreciated, thanks everyone in advance *Slopes :)

Katena32 [7]

This one is a bit more complicated but i believe the answer is -1/4

4 0

3 years ago

In a Pew Research Center poll of 745 randomly selected adults, 589 said that it is morally wrong to not report all income on tax

Nikolay [14]

Answer:

a

The null hypothesis is $H_o : p = 0.75$

The alternative hypothesis is $H_a : p \ne 0.75$

b

$t = 2.51$

c

$p-value = 0.01207$

d

There no sufficient evidence to conclude that 75% of adults say that it is morally wrong to not report all income on tax returns

Step-by-step explanation:

From the question we are told that

The sample size is $n = 745$

The number that said it is morally wrong is $k = 589$

The level of significance is $\alpha = 0.01$

The population proportion is $p = 0.75$

Generally the sample proportion is mathematically represented as

$\r p = \frac{k}{n}$

=> $\r p = \frac{589}{745}$

=> $\r p = 0.79$

The null hypothesis is $H_o : p = 0.75$

The alternative hypothesis is $H_a : p \ne 0.75$

The standard error is mathematically represented as

$SE = \sqrt{\frac{p(1-p)}{n} }$

=> $SE = \sqrt{\frac{0.75(1-0.75)}{745} }$

=> $SE =0.0159$

Generally the test statistics is mathematically represented as

$t = \frac{\r p - p }{SE}$

=> $t = \frac{0.79 - 0.75 }{0.0159}$

=> $t = 2.51$

Generally the p-value is mathematically represented as

$p-value = 2 * P(Z > 2.51)$

From the the z-table

$P(Z > 2.51) = 0.0060366$

=> $p-value = 2 * 0.0060366$

=> $p-value = 0.01207$

From the calculation $p-value >\alpha$

Hence we fail to reject the null hypothesis

Thus there no sufficient evidence to conclude that 75% of adults say that it is morally wrong to not report all income on tax returns

7 0

3 years ago