All categories

3 years ago

Please help i only have a few minutes left

Mathematics

1 answer:

Leni [432]3 years ago

6 0

Answer:

Negative effects of the Mongol Empire's expansion into Western europe, East Asia, include the wiping out of people that resisted given the violent nature of their invasions.

Positive effects include a century of peace those under under Mongol rule. This stability allowed for the reopening of the Silk Road trading routes between China and Europe, increasing cultural exchange and wealth all along the trade paths including Western Africa, East Asia and Europe.

Step-by-step explanation:

You might be interested in

It is not possible to prove one pair of triangles congruent and then use their congruent corresponding parts to prove another pa

borishaifa [10]

Answer:

true

The wording does not quite mean anything,

but what I think was meant to ask is

"if we use some parts of two triangles to prove they are congruent,

can we then use that to prove that

a pair of corresponding parts not used before are congruent?"

The answer is

Yes, of course,

Corresponding Parts of Congruent Triangles are Congruent,

which teachers usually abbreviate as CPCTC.

For example, if we find that

side AB is congruent with side DE,

side BC is congruent with side EF, and

angle ABC is congruent with angle DEF,

we can prove that triangles ABC and DEF are congruent

by Side-Angle-Side (SAS) congruence.

We then, by CPCTC, can conclude that other pairs of corresponding parts are congruent:

side AB is congruent with side DE,

angle BCA is congruent with angle EFD, and

angle CAB is congruent with angle FDE.

It was possible (by CPCTC) to prove those last 3 congruence statements,

after proving the triangles congruent.

The expected answer is FALSE.

Step-by-step explanation:

4 0

3 years ago

Read 2 more answers

How do you solve U/6=9

notsponge [240]

/ means divide, so U( an unknown value ) / 6 = 9. to get the answer, simply multiply 6 x 9

6 0

4 years ago

Explain how the difference of a fraction or a rational number and its additive inverse is equal to zero.

Jobisdone [24]

This question is in reverse (in two ways):

1. The definition of an additive inverse of a number is precisely that which, when added to the number, will give a sum of zero. 

The real problem, in certain fields, is usually to show that for all numbers in that field, there exists an additive inverse. 

Therefore, if you tell me that you have a number, and its additive inverse, and you plan to add them together, then I can tell you in advance that the sum MUST be zero. 

2. In your question, you use the word "difference", which does not work (unless the number is zero - 0 is an integer AND a rational number, and its additive inverse is -0 which is the same as 0 - the difference would be 0 - -0 = 0). 

For example, given the number 3, and its additive inverse -3, if you add them, you get zero: 
3 + (-3) = 0 

However, their "difference" will be 6 (or -6, depending which way you do the difference): 

3 - (-3) = 6 
-3 - 3 = -6 

(because -3 is a number in the integers, then it has an additive inverse, also in the integers, of +3). 

--- 

A rational number is simply a number that can be expressed as the "ratio" of two integers. For example, the number 4/7 is the ratio of "four to seven". 

It can be written as an endless decimal expansion 
0.571428571428571428....(forever), but that does not change its nature, because it CAN be written as a ratio, it is "rational". 

Integers are rational numbers as well (because you can always write 3/1, the ratio of 3 to 1, to express the integer we call "3") 

The additive inverse of a rational number, written as a ratio, is found by simply flipping the sign of the numerator (top) 

The additive inverse of 4/7 is -4/7 

and if you ADD those two numbers together, you get zero (as per the definition of "additive inverse") 

(4/7) + (-4/7) = 0/7 = 0 

If you need to "prove" it, you begin by the existence of additive inverses in the integers. 
ALL integers each have an additive inverse. 
For example, the additive inverse of 4 is -4 

Next, show that this (in the integers) can be applied to the rationals in this manner: 

(4/7) + (-4/7) = ? 
common denominator, therefore you can factor out the denominator: 

(4 + -4)/7 = ? 
Inside the bracket is the sum of an integer with its additive inverse, therefore the sum is zero 
(0)/7 = 0/7 = 0 

Since this is true for ALL integers, then it must also be true for ALL rational numbers.

5 0

3 years ago

What is (11 5/8 - 2 1/16) - 4 3/4 ?

Vitek1552 [10]

Answer:

4.8125 or 4 13/16

Step-by-step explanation:

(11 10/16 - 2 1/16) - 4 12/16

(9 9/16) - 4 12/16

4 .8125 or 4 13/16

3 0

3 years ago

ASAP Which diagram shows the correct setup for an electromagnet?

Bogdan [553]

Answer:

Step-by-step explanation:

a.p.e.x

7 0

3 years ago