So you know each french fry equals 25 calories. So amount of calories per french fry = 25f
Similarly we know each chicken wing has 100 calories so amount per chicken wing = 100c
So total calories = 25f+100c
Now we know that we want the total to be less than 500
Therefore the inequality should look like this
25f+100c<500
Answer:
95.15%
Step-by-step explanation:
We have that the mean (m) is equal to 20, the standard deviation (sd) 3
They ask us for P (x <25)
For this, the first thing is to calculate z, which is given by the following equation:
z = (x - m) / sd
We have all these values, replacing we have:
z = (25 - 20) / (3)
z = 1.66
With the normal distribution table (attached), we have that at that value, the probability is:
P (z <1.66) = 0.9515
Which means that the probability that it arrives before 25 minutes is 95.15%
9514 1404 393
Answer:
4a. ∠V≅∠Y
4b. TU ≅ WX
5. No; no applicable postulate
6. see below
Step-by-step explanation:
<h3>4.</h3>
a. When you use the ASA postulate, you are claiming you have shown two angles and the side between them to be congruent. Here, you're given side TV and angle T are congruent to their counterparts, sides WY and angle W. The angle at the other end of segment TV is angle V. Its counterpart is the other end of segment WY from angle W. In order to use ASA, we must show ...
∠V≅∠Y
__
b. When you use the SAS postulate, you are claiming you have shown two sides and the angle between them are congruent. The angle T is between sides TV and TU. The angle congruent to that, ∠W, is between sides WY and WX. Then the missing congruence that must be shown is ...
TU ≅ WX
__
<h3>5.</h3>
The marked congruences are for two sides and a non-included angle. There is no SSA postulate for proving congruence. (In fact, there are two different possible triangles that have the given dimensions. This can be seen in the fact that the given angle is opposite the shortest of the given sides.)
"No, we cannot prove they are congruent because none of the five postulates or theorems can be used."
__
<h3>6.</h3>
The first statement/reason is always the list of "given" statements.
1. ∠A≅∠D, AC≅DC . . . . given
2. . . . . vertical angles are congruent
3. . . . . ASA postulate
4. . . . . CPCTC
Answer: the probability of landing on blue as more and more colors are added is low because as you add more colors there is less and less of the blue
Step-by-step explanation: i am honestly just guessing dont come at me!!!
