Answer:
No I do not agree with Andre says that 3 divided by 2/3 Solving for 3 ÷ 2/3
3 ÷ 2/3
= 3 × 3/2
= 9/2
= 4 1/2
Therefore, 3 divided by 2/3 is 4 1/2
Andre's reasoning is wrong.
Step-by-step explanation:
It is incorrect
Let's divide and compare the sum
3 : 2/3 = 3*3/2 = 9/2 = 4 1/2
and
There are four 2/3 fractions and one 1/3 fraction
The 1/3 fraction is 1/2 of 2/3 fraction so instead of counting 1/3 as 1/3 it should be counted as 1/2
1. The area of the photograph is:
A=LxW
A is the area of the photograph (A=54 in²).
L is the lenght of the photograph (L=12-4x).
W is the widht of the photograph (W=12-2x)
2. When you substitute these values into the formula A=LxW, you obtain:
A=LxW
54=(12-4x)(12-2x)
3. When you apply the distributive property, you have:
54=144-24x-48x+8x²
8x²-72x+144-54=0
4. Finally, you obtain a quadratic equation for the area of the photo:
8x²-72x+90=0
5. Therefore, the answer is:
8x²-72x+90=0
It is B. 32 in.
because you at the sum up all the sides of the shape.
There are several important information's already given in the question. Based on those given information's the answer to the question can be easily deduced.
Regular price of the pair of pants = $28
Percentage of discount on the regular price = 20%
Then
Amount of discount = (20/100) * 28 dollars
= 28/5 dollars
= 5.60 dollars
So the amount of $5.60 will be taken off the regular price. I hope the procedure is clear enough for you to understand. You can always use this method for solving similar type of problems without requiring any help from outside.