<h3>Given</h3>
tan(x)²·sin(x) = tan(x)²
<h3>Find</h3>
x on the interval [0, 2π)
<h3>Solution</h3>
Subtract the right side and factor. Then make use of the zero-product rule.
... tan(x)²·sin(x) -tan(x)² = 0
... tan(x)²·(sin(x) -1) = 0
This is an indeterminate form at x = π/2 and undefined at x = 3π/2. We can resolve the indeterminate form by using an identity for tan(x)²:
... tan(x)² = sin(x)²/cos(x)² = sin(x)²/(1 -sin(x)²)
Then our equation becomes
... sin(x)²·(sin(x) -1)/((1 -sin(x))(1 +sin(x))) = 0
... -sin(x)²/(1 +sin(x)) = 0
Now, we know the only solutions are found where sin(x) = 0, at ...
... x ∈ {0, π}
Answer:
1/5^7 (the last one)
Step-by-step explanation:
When dividing exponents you subtract the the two exponents. In this case you subtract 3 from -4. -4-3=-7. So you have 5^-7. That is also equal to 1/5^7
Solution:
Given:
Since b and d are nonzero elements, then it is the product of two rational numbers.
Multiplying two rational numbers produces another rational number.
Therefore, the product is a rational expression.
OPTION C is the correct answer.
Answer:
solution:
x = pounds of cashews = 20
y = pounds of peanuts = 70
Step-by-step explanation:
x = pounds of cashews
y = pounds of peanuts
---
4.75x + 2.50y = 3.00*90
x + y = 90
---
put the system of linear equations into standard form
---
4.75x + 2.50y = 270
x + y = 90
Answer:
Both (B) and (C) are correct
Step-by-step explanation:
Explaining in simple terms, The Simpson's paradox simply describes a phenomenon which occurs when observable trends in a relationship, which are obvious during singular evaluation of the variables disappears when each of this relationships are combined. This is what played out when hitmire appears to d well on both of natyraknamd artificial turf when separately compared, but isn't the same when the turf data was combined. Also, performance may actually not be related to the turf as turf may Just be. a lurking variable causing a spurious association in performance.
