it is definitely 77 becuase 7 times 11 is 77
Answer:
C
Step-by-step explanation:
There is no way of telling what the means are.
- The expression was rewritten using the commutative law of addition.
- Line 1 says 3 + 4, which could be represented using dots as ••• + •••• for a total of 7 dots.
- Line 2 says 4 + 3, which could be represented using dots as •••• + ••• for a total of 7 dots.
<h3>What is the
commutative law of addition?</h3>
The commutative law of addition is also referred to as the law of cumulative addition and it states that if two numbers are added together, then, the outcome is equal to the addition of their interchanged position because addition is considered as a binary operation.
This ultimately implies that, the sum of addends would always be the same (equal) regardless of their arrangement in accordance with the commutative law of addition. Mathematically, the commutative law of addition can be represented using the following formula:
A + B = B + A.
In this context, we can reasonably infer and logically deduce that the given expression was rewritten using the commutative law of addition.
In conclusion, Line 1 says 3 + 4, which could be represented using dots as ••• + •••• for a total of 7 dots. Line 2 says 4 + 3, which could be represented using dots as •••• + ••• for a total of 7 dots.
Read more on commutative law of addition here: brainly.com/question/778086
#SPJ1
E=Z*sqrt (p(1-p)/N), where E= error margin, p=proportion, N=sample size
Katrina's margin error at 85% confidence interval: E=1.96*sqrt (p(1-p)/100) = 0.196 sqrt (1(1-p))
Mathew's margin error at 99% confidence interval: E= 2.58*sqrt (p(1-p)/400) = 0.129 sqrt (p(1-p))
Since both obtained same estimate of proportion (that is, value of p), it can be seen that Mathew's estimate will have a small error (That is, 0.129 is smaller than 0.196). This can be attributed to larger sample size although a wider confidence (99%) interval was considered.
