Answer:
Length of rectangle: 2n - (1/3) + 9/(3n)
Width of rectangle = 3n
Rectangle area = A = 6 n^2 - n + 9
Step-by-step explanation:
Rectangle area = A = 6 n^2 - n + 9
test what the roots are: b^2 - 4ac = (-1)^2 - 4*6*9 < 0 no real roots
-215 < 0 discriminant
(6 n^2 - n + 9) / (3n) =
2n - (1/3) + 9/(3n)
If the area is divided by 3n, the quotient is 2n - (1/3) and the remainder is 9
Answer:
You will have 128 orange marbles
Step-by-step explanation:
Set this up as an equation
Variable x = number of orange marbles
3/8 = 48/x
Cross multiply
3 × x = 8 × 48
3x = 384
Divide both sides by 3 to isolate the variable
3x ÷ 3 = 384 ÷ 3
1x = 128
x = 128
128 orange marbles
Check work:
Substitute the variable x for the answer
3/8 = 48/128
Cross multiply
3 × 128 = 8 × 48
384 = 384
If the numbers equal, the answer is correct
No it is not, whatsoever.
$1 for 2 cups. 14 cups in an afternoon means they got $7. If they did this for three days (7 x 3) they'd have 21 dollars. it is not reasonable because 21 is nowhere near 50.
Hope this helps
1/4 divided by 3
3/1 would become 1/3 because you changed from division to multiplication
1/4 times 1/3= 1/12
Hope this helped
Answer: Choice B
There is not convincing evidence because the interval contains 0.
========================================================
Explanation:
The confidence interval is (-0.29, 0.09)
This is the same as writing -0.29 < p1-p1 < 0.09
The thing we're trying to estimate (p1-p2) is between -0.29 and 0.09
Because 0 is in this interval, it is possible that p1-p1 = 0 which leads to p1 = p2.
Therefore, it is possible that the population proportions are the same.
The question asks " is there convincing evidence of a difference in the true proportions", so the answer to this is "no, there isn't convincing evidence". We would need both endpoints of the confidence interval to either be positive together, or be negative together, for us to have convincing evidence that the population proportions are different.
