Answer:
Statement 1 and 2
Step-by-step explanation:
If you take t^2 - 16t + 55 and find some of its graphical values, you will get:
Turning point: (8,-9)
Roots: (5,0) and (11,0)
When this graph is plotted and you imagine the x axis to be time (as stated in the question), each of the roots (x - intercept) must be when the swimmer goes under and when they come back up.
This means that the swimmer dived under the water at 5 seconds and came back up at 9, making the first 2 statements correct.
Now the fourth statement is ruled out.
The fifth statement is not plausible as the graph would have to have more than 2 roots for the swimmer to enter the water twice.
That leaves the third statement. If you imagine the depth of the swimmer to be the y axis of our imaginary graph, and we know that the y axis of the turning point is -9, that means that the swimmer's deepest dive was 9 feet under the water, ruling out the third statement too.
Hope this helps :D
Sure. From those choices, the only one that makes sense is that he
didn't perform enough trials. Technically, you can't expect the experimental
probability to match the theoretical probability until you've rolled it an infinite
number of times.
I have a hunch that even for only 60 trials, such a great discrepancy between
theory and experiment is beginning to suggest that the cubie is loaded. But
you really can't say. You just have to keep trying and watch how the numbers
add up.
Answer:
5
Step-by-step explanation:
y = 15 - 3x
0 = 15 - 3x
15 - 0 = 3x
x = 5
Answer is the B Sure let’s gooo
