Quadratic formula: (-b +/- sqrt(b^2 - 4ac)) / 2a
a = 10
b = -1
c = 9
1 +/- sqrt((-1)^2 - 4(10)(9)) / 2(10)
1 +/- sqrt(1 - 360) / 20
x = 1 +/- sqrt(359i) / 20
Hope this helps!
Let's make the inequality.
The sum of twice a number and 2. We're adding and multiply. X will be the number. 2x+2
Is greater than 4. We'll be using the greater than sign. >4; let's put it together.
2x+2>4; let's solve. First by subtracting two on both sides. 2x>2; let's divide by 2. x>1
So, the inequality is 2x+2>4. To solve it, it is x>1.
Look up on google to find out the answer that’s how I get mine
Step-by-step explanation:
It cannot be (4, -3) as there would be 2 outputs (3 and -3) for the input 4, therefore it becomes a one-to-many relationship and not a function.
Answer: There is not a good prediction for the height of the tree when it is 100 years old because the prediction given by the trend line produced by the regression calculator probably is not valid that far in the future.
Step-by-step explanation:
Years since tree was planted (x) - - - - height (y)
2 - - - - 17
3 - - - - 25
5 - - - 42
6 - - - - 47
7 - - - 54
9 - - - 69
Using a regression calculator :
The height of tree can be modeled by the equation : ŷ = 7.36X + 3.08
With y being the predicted variable; 7.36 being the slope and 3.08 as the intercept.
X is the independent variable which is used in calculating the value of y.
Predicted height when years since tree was planted(x) = 100
ŷ = 7.36X + 3.08
ŷ = 7.36(100) + 3.08
y = 736 + 3.08
y = 739.08
Forward prediction of 100 years produced by the trendline would probably give an invalid value because the trendline only models a range of 9 years prediction. However, a linear regression equation isn't the best for making prediction that far in into the future.
