Vance used the associative property to write (4.5 m + StartFraction 7 Over 8 EndFraction) minus 9 as the equivalent expression 4
.5 m (StartFraction 7 Over 8 EndFraction minus 9). Did Vance apply the associative property correctly? Why or why not? Yes, the terms with variables should be written first.
Yes, the terms can be regrouped and still be equivalent.
No, the order of the terms should have been changed.
No, the addition symbol was dropped in the second expression.
the fourth choice: No, the addition symbol was dropped in the second expression
Step-by-step explanation:
1) The right operation is: (4.5m + 7/8) - 9 = 4.5m + (7/8 - 9), this is you have to keep the + operator, since you are just grouping the terms in an alternate form.
2) Droping the + operator leads incorrectly to the multiplication of the first term, 4.5m to the terms in parenthesis, instead to the addition, which is what corresponds.
<u>The minimum distance is 492 meters from the house (500 - 8 = 492), and the maximum distance is 508 meters from the house (500 + 8 = 508). The dog may be slightly closer to the house, depending on how long the dog is, or if Morgan is using a leash extender.</u>
