No, -8 - 2(3 + 2n) + 7n is not equivalent to -30 - 13n
Step-by-step explanation:
Let us revise the operation of the negative and positive numbers
- (-) + (-) = (-)
- (-) × (-) = (+)
- (-) + (+) = the sign of greatest [(-) if the greatest is (-) or (+) if the greatest is (+)]
- (-) × (+) = (-)
- (-) - (+) = (-)
- (+) - (-) = (+)
∵ The expression is -8 - 2(3 + 2n) + 7n
- Simplify it
∵ 2(3 + 2n) = 2(3) + 2(2n) = 6 + 4n
∴ -8 - 2(3 + 2n) + 7n = -8 - (6 + 4n) + 7n
- Multiply the bracket by (-)
∴ -8 - (6 + 4n) + 7n = -8 - 6 - 4n + 7n
- Add the like terms
∴ -8 - (6 + 4n) + 7n = (-8 - 6) - 4n + 7n
∴ -8 - (6 + 4n) + 7n = -14 + 3n
∴ -8 - 2(3 + 2n) + 7n is equivalent to -14 + 3n
∵ -14 + 3n ≠ -30 - 13n
∴ -8 - 2(3 + 2n) + 7n is not equivalent to -30 - 13n
No, -8 - 2(3 + 2n) + 7n is not equivalent to -30 - 13n
Learn more:
You can learn more about the directed numbers in brainly.com/question/10364988
#LearnwithBrainly
Answer:
no
Step-by-step explanation:
A right triangle consists of one angle being 90 degrees. Contrast to this picture, the triangle has no angle of 90 degrees.
Answer: Inferential.
It is inferential because the survey takes its conclusion(inference) from a sample of the country's population and generalized it on the entire population.
If the results of a survey were claimed to indicate that 7.8% of adults in this country who own digital cameras plan to replace their cameras in the next 12 months. would you say this statement is descriptive or inferential, why?
Step-by-step explanation:
It is inferential because the survey takes its conclusion(inference) from a sample of the country's population and generalized it on the entire population. this claim requires an inference to the population. For example, you might stand in a mall and ask a sample of 200 people if they like shopping at ShopRite. You could make a bar chart of yes or no answers (that would be descriptive statistics) or you could use your research (and inferential statistics) to reason that around 50-75% of the population (all shoppers in malls) like shopping at ShopRite.
Yes, that is the famous first Pythagorean triplet: 3²+4²=5²
or
For three lengths to be able to form a triangle, it suffices that every one of those lengths is shorter than the sum and longer than the difference of the other two.
It is enough to check just one side.
So,
3 + 4 > 5
4 - 3 < 5
Your triangle is constructible.
< is the answer. Hope this helps!
