Ask question

Ask question

All categories

Harlamova29_29 [7]

3 years ago

10

Hey whats

8 \times 1000} " alt=" \sqrt[3]{8 \times 1000} " align="absmiddle" class="latex-formula">
Don't answer

2 answers:

marysya [2.9K]3 years ago

8 0

Answer:

20 is your answer

u hope it helps

kolezko [41]3 years ago

7 0

Answer:

$\huge{\textbf{\textsf{{\color{skyblue}{An}}{\blue{sw}}{\red{er}}{\color{red}{:}}}}}$

$\sqrt[3]{8 \times 1000} \\ = 2 \times 10 \\ 20$

You might be interested in

Is 3/4 greater than 7/8?

yKpoI14uk [10]

3/4 = (2*3) / (2* 4) = 6/8

7/8.

Is 3/4 greater than 7/8?
Is like asking is 6/8 greater than 7/8? Because 3/4 is equivalent to 6/8.

The answer is No.

3 0

3 years ago

Read 2 more answers

An employer uses the linear regression equation y = 0.18 x + 320.22 to predict the weekly salary, y, of an employee who sells x

Nata [24]

Answer:

Option C is correct.

Alex earned about $60 more than Joaquin did.

Step-by-step explanation:

The linear regression equation

y = 0.18 x + 320.22

is used to predict the weekly salary, y, of an employee who sells x dollars worth of merchandise.

Joaquin sold $1500 worth of goods. Meaning that x for that week for Joaquin is 1500.

Joaquin' s salary for that week is then given as

y = 0.18x + 320.22

y = 0.18(1500) + 320.22 = 590.22

Hence, Joaquin's salary for that week = $590.22

Alex earns $650 that week. Meaning that y for Alex in that week = 650

y = 0.18x + 320.22

650 = 0.18x + 320.22

0.18x = 650 - 320.22 = 329.78

x = (329.78/0.18) = 1832.1

Hence, Alex sold goods worth $1832.1 that week.

Joaquin sold goods worth $1500

Joaquin earned $590.22

Alex sold goods worth $1832.1

Alex earned $650

From this calculation, it is evident that 'Alex earned about $60 more than Joaquin did' is the correct option as $650 is about $60 more than $590.22

Hope this Helps!!!

7 0

3 years ago

Read 2 more answers

What equation is graphed in this figure?

topjm [15]

Answer:

The third equation: $y+2=-3(x-1)$

Step-by-step explanation:

The two points on the line are $(-1,4)$ and $(1,-2)$ .

Slope of the line passing through two points $(x_{1},y_{1})$ and $(x_{2},y_{2})$ is given as:

$m=(y_{2} -y_{1})/ (x_{2} -x_{1})$

Here, $(x_{1},y_{1})$ and $(x_{2},y_{2})$ are $(-1,4)$ and $(1,-2)$ .

Therefore, slope is equal to, $m=(-2-4 )/ (1-(-1)$

$m=-6/2$

$m=-3$

Now, equation of a straight line with slope m and points $(x_{1},y_{1})$ and $(x_{2},y_{2})$ is given as:

$y-y_{1}=m(x-x_{1})\\y-y_{2}=m(x-x_{2})$

Now, if we use the 2nd form, then $x_{2}=1,y_{2}=-2$ .

So, the equation is given as :

$y-(-2)=-3(x-1)\\y+2=-3(x-1)$

8 0

3 years ago

Can someone pls help, I know this is kind of a lot but I’ve been stuck on this for a while now.

Greeley [361]

9514 1404 393

Answer:

(a, b, c) = (-0.425595, 11.7321, 2.16667)

f(x) = -0.425595x² +11.7321x +2.16667

f(1) ≈ 13.5

Step-by-step explanation:

A suitable tool makes short work of this. Most spreadsheets and graphing calculators will do quadratic regression. All you have to do is enter the data and make use of the appropriate built-in functions.

Desmos will do least-squares fitting of almost any function you want to use as a model. It tells you ...

a = -0.425595

b = 11.7321

c = 2.16667

so

f(x) = -0.425595x² +11.7321x +2.16667

and f(1) ≈ 13.5

_____

<em>Additional comment</em>

Note that a quadratic function doesn't model the data very well if you're trying to extrapolate to times outside the original domain.

3 0

3 years ago

The ratio of two computers is 3:2.

serious [3.7K]

Answer:

1. $82,500

2. 169 : 110

Step-by-step explanation:

The computation is shown below:

Given that

1. Ratio between two computers is 3:2

And the first computer cost is $55,000

Let us assume the price of the second computer be x.

As we know that

Product of extremes = Product of mean.

2 : 3 :: 55000 : x .

Now cross mutiplication is to be done

2x = $55,000 × 3

x = $1,650,000 ÷ 2

= $82,500

2. Now if the price of the 2nd computer rised by $2,000

So the new cost would be

= $82,500 + $2,000

= $84,500

Now the ratio would be

= $55,000 : $84,500

= 169: 110

8 0

3 years ago