The set of integers greater than 50

Mathematics

1 answer:

UkoKoshka [18]3 years ago

5 0

The set of integers greater than 50 are (51,52,53,54...)

You might be interested in

Algebra 1 CR-8

antiseptic1488 [7]

$\mathrm{Domain\:of\:}\:x^2+2x-15\::\quad \begin{bmatrix}\mathrm{Solution:}\:&\:-\infty \:$

$\mathrm{Range\:of\:}x^2+2x-15:\quad \begin{bmatrix}\mathrm{Solution:}\:&\:f\left(x\right)\ge \:-16\:\\ \:\mathrm{Interval\:Notation:}&\:[-16,\:\infty \:)\end{bmatrix}$

$\mathrm{Axis\:interception\:points\:of}\:x^2+2x-15:\quad \mathrm{X\:Intercepts}:\:\left(3,\:0\right),\:\left(-5,\:0\right),\:\mathrm{Y\:Intercepts}:\:\left(0,\:-15\right)$

$\mathrm{Vertex\:of}\:x^2+2x-15:\quad \mathrm{Minimum}\space\left(-1,\:-16\right)$

4 0

3 years ago

If you add one-third of a number to the number itself, you get 16.what is the number?

GuDViN [60]

The answer to this is 12.

One third of 12 is 4.

12+4=16

Comment if you have ANY questions!

Hope this helps!

7 0

3 years ago

Read 2 more answers

Simplify 10 + 4(x + 1) + 5

Levart [38]

Distribute
10+4x+4+5

Combine like terms
19+4x

Final answer: 4x+19

4 0

3 years ago

Kiwi and Corn got into an argument over if 1.75 was a reasonable estimate for 6. Do you think 1.75 was a reasonable estimate for

snow_tiger [21]

Answer:

No, it is not.

Step-by-step explanation:

comparing the two given values, 1.75 and 6, estimating 1.75 for 6 is not reasonable. This is due to the fact that converting 1.75 to the nearest whole number gives 2 which is far away from 6. Since,

6 - 2 = 4

So, estimating 1.75 for 6 would involve a large value of error. Which make it unreasonable. It would have been more reasonable to estimate 1.75 for 2.

4 0

3 years ago

120 books increased by 55%

Novay_Z [31]

<span> To find 55% of 120 books, multiply 120 x .55
Then add that answer to the original 120.</span>

120 + 55% = 186

6 0

3 years ago