Answer:
She used inductive reasoning. (False)
She used the law of detachment. (True)
Her conclusion is valid. (True)
The statements can be represented as "if p, then q and if q, then r." (False)
Her conclusion is true. (True)
Step-by-step explanation:
p = Two lines are perpendicular
q = They intersect at Right angles.
Given: A and B are perpendicular
Conclusion: A and B intersect at right angle.
According to the law of detachment, There are two premises (statements that are accepted as true) and a conclusion. They must follow the pattern as shown below.
Statement 1: If p, then q.
Statement 2: p
Conclusion: q
In our case the pattern is followed. The truth of the premises logically guarantees the truth of the conclusion. So her conclusion is true and valid.
Answer:
If I had to take an educated guess I'd say 126° but I'm not 100% sure.
Using a system of equations, it is found that initially Ada has $0.385.
For the system, we have that the variables are:
- x is Ada's amount.
- y is Betty's amount.
- z is Chris's amount.
- w is David's amount.
$45 total, hence:
Ada <u>gets 2 from Betty</u>, hence:
<u>Chris triples</u> his money and <u>David's</u> money is <u>cut by half</u> four of them have the same amount, hence:
Then:
Solving for w, we find Ada's initial amount.
Initially, Ada has $0.385.
A similar problem is given at brainly.com/question/6120515
Answer:
Step-by-step explanation:
factors for
40=1,2,4,5,8,10,20,40
41=1,41 prime
3526=1,2,41,43,82,86,1763,3526
1001=1,7,11,13,77,91,143,1001
Answer:
68469.44
Multiplication is commutative so can be multiplied anyway
(2.0× 109)(3.02×104)
2.0 can be written as ( 20÷ 10) and 3.02 can be written as (302÷ 100)
(2× 109){(3.02÷ 100)× 104]
(218)(7852÷ 25)
68469.44
