All categories

2 years ago

Is Anyone know the answer????

Mathematics

2 answers:

ElenaW [278]2 years ago

6 0

Answer: ∠1 = 10°

Step-by-step explanation:

∠1 = ∠2

2x + 20 = 3x + 10

2x + 20 + (-3x - 20) = 3x + 10 + (-3x - 20)

-x = -10

x = 10

Alinara [238K]2 years ago

4 0

Answer:

Angle 1 = 40

Step-by-step explanation:

Angle 1 and Angle 2 are alternate angles. So,

2x + 20 = 3x + 10

3x - 2x = 20 - 10

x = 10

Angle 1 = 2x + 20 = 2 x 10 + 20 = 40

You might be interested in

At Davidson’s bike rentals, it costs $10 to rent a bike for 3 hours. How many dollars does it cost per hour of bike use?

S_A_V [24]

Answer:

10 = 3 hours

one hour = 3.33 dollars

Step-by-step explanation:

8 0

2 years ago

Read 2 more answers

75% of what number is 42?

Anna35 [415]

75 42
----- -----
100 x

75 x= 4200
--- ------
75 75

x = 56

6 0

3 years ago

Read 2 more answers

For each of the graphs below choose inequality that best represent the graph. explain your reasoning.

Sveta_85 [38]

The desired inequalities are given as follows:

A. A. x > x + 1. because solving it yields an inequality that is False for all real numbers x.

B. D. x < x + 1, because solving it yields an inequality that is True for all real numbers x.

<h3>Which inequality represents graph A?</h3>

For graph A, as nothing is plotted on the line, we have a inequality with no solution.

The successor of a number(number plus 1), will always be greater than the number, hence the inequality that has no solution is:

A. x > x + 1. because solving it yields an inequality that is False for all real numbers x.

<h3>Which inequality represents graph B?</h3>

For graph B, as the entire line is plotted, we have a inequality with all real values as solution.

From the same logic above, of the successor, the correct option is:

D. x < x + 1, because solving it yields an inequality that is True for all real numbers x.

More can be learned about inequalities at brainly.com/question/25235995

#SPJ1

4 0

2 years ago

Multiply the sum “n+25” by 3/5

Mars2501 [29]

Answer:

Step-by-step explanation:

4 0

3 years ago

Let n be a natural number. Show that 3 | n3 −n

Vladimir [108]

Let $n=1$ . Then $n^3-n=1^3-1=0$ . By convention, every non-zero integer $n$ divides 0, so $3\vert n^3-n$ .

Suppose this relation holds for $n=k$ , i.e. $3\vert k^3-k$ . We then hope to show it must also hold for $n=k+1$ .

You have

$(k+1)^3-(k+1)=(k^3+3k^2+3k+1)-(k+1)=(k^3-k)+3(k^2+k)$

We assumed that $3\vert k^3-k$ , and it's clear that $3\vert 3(k^2+k)$ because $3(k^2+k)$ is a multiple of 3. This means the remainder upon divides $(k+1)^3-(k+1)$ must be 0, and therefore the relation holds for $n=k+1$ . This proves the statement.

4 0

3 years ago