Answer:
x - intercepts are (-7,0) and (-2,0)
A is the correct option.
Step-by-step explanation:
We have been given the equation of the parabola 
For x- intercept, y = 0
We can split the middle term as 9x = 7x +2x
Now take GCF
Factored out the common term
Apply the zero product property
Solve for x
Hence, x - intercepts are (-7,0) and (-2,0)
A is the correct option.
Answer:
x=
28
/89
Step-by-step explanation:
3x(32)=7x+28
Step 1: Simplify both sides of the equation.
96x=7x+28
Step 2: Subtract 7 from both sides.
96x 7x+28
−7 −7
89x=28
Step 3: Divide both sides by 89.
89x
/89
=
28
/89
The correct answer is: Proust Was a Neuroscientist<span> by Jonah Lehrer
Science ordinarily applies a reductionist approach. To structure a testable theory that could Additionally make faultlessly retested, simulated constructs would made. This is carried will permit clean analyses Also information about statistically huge correctness. However, the test will be we should constantly make what we’ve discovered et cetera check whether it fits Previously, with the bigger picture of how things worth of effort. Our particular social order regularly imitates this reductionist approach Concerning illustration it may be progressively disjointed, with accentuation on the need will practice. As a rule A large portion researchers don't completely appreciate, understand, alternately worth the human experience Also practically specialists don't completely appreciate, understand, alternately quality those rigors of the experimental technique. [I will concede on this continuum, i might fit additional under the experimental outlook battling on like craftsmanship. ] what i might have been laid open should for perusing Proust might have been An neuroscientist is how frequently all the Workmanship predated science. With watchful investigation under those reality of the human experience there may be extraordinary knowledge under mankind's nature, our senses, and the route our universe meets expectations. Mind blowing specialists intuited the thing that the researchers of the day didn't have confidence alternately Might not yet substantiate. With occasion when science need made up for lost time with the thing that symbolization recently knew, Be that i wonder how regularly this transaction of the two planets might have been acknowledged what's more entryway much speedier we Might have gotten here whether science seen art.
</span>
Answer:
Step-by-step explanation:
So in this example we'll be using the difference of squares which essentially states that: 
or another way to think of it would be: 
. So in this example you'll notice both terms are perfect squares. in fact x^n is a perfect square as long as n is even. This is because if it's even it can be split into two groups evenly for example, in this case we have x^8. so the square root is x^4 because you can split this up into (x * x * x * x) * (x * x * x * x) = x^8. Two groups with equal value multiplying to get x^8, that's what the square root is. So using these we can rewrite the equation as:
Now in this case you'll notice the degree is still even (it's 4) and the 4 is also a perfect square, and it's a difference of squares in one of the factors, so it can further be rewritten:
So completely factored form is: 
I'm assuming that's considered completely factored but you can technically factor it further. While the identity difference of squares technically only applies to difference of squares, it can also be used on the sum of squares, but you need to use imaginary numbers. Because 
. and in this case a=x^2 and b=-4. So rewriting it as the difference of squares becomes: 
just something that might be useful in some cases.
