All categories

3 years ago

Abigail runs a 35 mile race. After an hour she has run 20% of the race. How far did Abigail run in an hour?

Mathematics

2 answers:

Pie3 years ago

5 0

Answer:

7 miles

Step-by-step explanation:

35 x 0.2 = 7 miles

jarptica [38.1K]3 years ago

4 0

Answer:

7 mile

Step-by-step explanation:

In 1 hour, Abigail covers 20% of total distance.

In 1 hour, Abigail covers 20% of 35 mile

In 1 hour, Abigail covers (20/100 × 35) = 7 mile

You might be interested in

Simplify (23)^–2 genuinely confused

statuscvo [17]

Answer:

1/529

Step-by-step explanation:

$23^{-2}\\\\\mathrm{Apply\:exponent\:rule}:\quad \:a^{-b}=\frac{1}{a^b}\\23^{-2}=\frac{1}{23^2}\\\\23^2=529\\\\=\frac{1}{529}$

7 0

3 years ago

an iron rod of length 7 upon 8 m was cut into two pieces one piece is 1 upon 7 m long what is the length of the other piece.

bixtya [17]

Answer:

other: $\frac{41}{56}$

Step-by-step explanation:

$\frac{7}{8} =\frac{1}{7} + x\\=> x= \frac{7}{8} - \frac{1}{7} \\=> x= \frac{49}{56} - \frac{8}{56} \\=> x= \frac{41}{56}$

8 0

2 years ago

Each month, an American household generates an average of 28 pounds of newspaper for garbage or recycling. Assume the standard d

Annette [7]

a) For x = 27:

z = 27-28/2 = -0.5

For x = 31:

z = 31-38/2 = 1.5

From the normal distribution table, P(27 < x < 31) = P(-0.5 < z < 1.5) = P(z < 1.5) - P(z < -0.5) = 0.9332 - 0.3085 = 62.47%

b) For x > 30.2:

z = 30.2-28/2 = 1.1

From the normal distribution table, P(x > 30.2) = P(z > 1.1) = 1 - P(z > 1.1) = 1 - 0.8643 = 13.57%

4 0

2 years ago

Adam wrote a check for $38 to pay his monthly gas bill, but when balancing his checkbook, he accidently recorded it as a credit

Alex73 [517]

It would be $76 over, I hope this helps.

7 0

3 years ago

Read 2 more answers

Mark the statement either true (in all cases) or false (for at least one example). If false, construct a specific example to sho

LUCKY_DIMON [66]

Answer with Step-by-step explanation:

We are given that $v_1,v_2,..,v_4$ are in $R^4$ and $v_1,v_2,v_3$ is linearly dependent then {v_1,v_2,v_3,v_4}[/tex] is also linearly dependent.

We have to find that given statement is true or false.

Dependent vectors:Dependent vectors are those vectors in which atleast one vector is a linear combination of other given vectors.

Or If we have vectors $x_1,x_2,....x_n$

Then their linear combination

$a_1x_1+a_2x_2+.....+a_nx_n=0$

There exist at least one scalar which is not zero.

If $v_1,v_2,v_3$ are dependent vectors then

$a_1v_1+a_2v_2+a_3v_3=0$ for scalars $a_1,a_2,a_3$

Then , by definition of dependent vectors

There exist a vector which is not equal to zero

If vector $v_3$ is a linear combination of $v_1\;and \;v_2$ , So at least one of vectors in the set is a linear combination of others and the set is linearly dependent.

Hence, by definition of dependent vectors

{ $v_1,v_2,v_3,v_4$ } is linearly dependent.

Option B is true.

8 0

3 years ago