All categories

3 years ago

How do I subtract decimals from whole numbers?

Mathematics

1 answer:

Gekata [30.6K]3 years ago

7 0

Answer:

Just use long subtraction by expanding the decimal places of the whole number. This is done by adding a point, and enough zeros to it to match the number of decimal digits in the other number (digits after the decimal point).

12345678

i.e: 5 - 2.48374827, 2.48374827 has 8 decimal digits, so add 8 zeros after the point.

1 1 1 1 1 1 1

5.00000000

2.48374827

_______________

2.51625173

7 + 3 = 10, 7 + 2 + 1 = 10, 8 + 1 + 1= 10, 5 + 4 + 1 = 10, 2 + 7 + 1 = 10, 3 + 6 + 1 = 10, 1 + 8 + 1 = 10, 5 + 4 + 1 = 10, 2 + 2 + 1 = 5 : 5.00000000

This is basically borrowing a group of 10s which are the same as 1s in the next decimal place up.

For each digit except the first to the right, let 10 subtract that number from it and minus 1 since the 1 is carried over.

You might be interested in

If A It is given that R = {(a, 1), (b, 2), (C, 3)}. Find the range and domain of R.

suter [353]

Answer:

the range of R =(1,2,3)

domain of R= (a,b,c)

8 0

2 years ago

Barry found a computer at Staples for $989. A week later, the computer went on sale for $849. What

JulijaS [17]

Barry found a computer at Staples for $989. A week later, the computer went on sale for $849. The percentage change is 14.156 % decrease

Solution:

Given that Barry found a computer at Staples for $989

A week later, the computer went on sale for $849

To find: percent of change

Percent change is the extent to which a variable gains or loses value. The figures are arrived at by comparing the initial (or before) and final (or after) quantities according to a specific formula.

THE PERCENT CHANGE IS GIVEN AS:

$\text{ percent change } =\frac{\text { final value - initial value }}{\text { initial value }} \times 100$

If the result is positive, it is percentage increase

If the result is negative, it is percentage decrease

Here initial value = 989 and final value = 849

Substituting the values in above formula,

$\begin{aligned}&\text { percent change }=\frac{849-989}{989} \times 100\\\\&\text { percent change }=-0.14155 \times 100=-14.156 \%\end{aligned}$

Here negative sign denotes percentage decrease

Thus percentage change is 14.156 % decrease

8 0

3 years ago

Tony has 2/3 of a bag of dark chocolate chips and 4/5 of a bag of white chocolate chips determinate a result the pool estimate o

Lina20 [59]

Answer:

n=3

Step-by-step explanation;

36n^2=4

n^2=4/36

n^2=1/9

to make 9 a numerator take the reciprocal of 1/9

n^2= -9

take square root on both sides

n=3

6 0

2 years ago

Which value is not part of the five-number summary for the following data set?

valentina_108 [34]

Answer:

D. 24

Step-by-step explanation:

The 5-number summary of a data set includes ...

minimum
1st quartile
median (2nd quartile)
3rd quartile
maximum

<h3>Summary values</h3>

When the data are written in increasing order, they are ...

23 23 24 27 27 28 30 30 30 33 34 35

The minimum is the first value on the list, 23.

The first quartile is the average of the two middle values in the lower half of the data set: (24+27)/2 = 25.5.

The median is the average of the two middle values: (28+30)/2 = 29.

The third quartile is the average of the two middle values in the upper half of the data set: (30+33)/2 = 31.5.

The maximum is the last value on the list: 35.

<h3>Answer choices</h3>

A. 29 is the median

B. 23 is the minimum

C. 31.5 is the 3rd quartile

D. 24 is not part of the 5-number summary

7 0

1 year ago

As you probably know, there is still a difference in wages for men vs. women in this country. Besides straight-up

vesna_86 [32]

9514 1404 393

Answer:

year 2066

Step-by-step explanation:

In order to do this, we need to make some assumptions. We'll assume that the 2010 wages are also in 2009 dollars. (If not, there's an inflation factor that needs to be accounted for.) We also need to assume the form of the change in wages over time. The simplest assumption there is that wages change linearly.

Then we can write equations for men's and women's wages as follows:

Using the 2-point form of the equation for a line, we have ...

y = (y2 -y1)/(x2 -x1)(x -x1) +y1

Men's wages

y = (42800 -38907)/(2010-1960)(x -1960) +38907

y = 77.86(x -1960) +38907

y = 77.86x -113,698.6 . . . . . where x is the year

Women's wages

y = (34700 -23606)/(2010 -1960)(x -1960) +23606

y = 221.88x -411,278

These values are equal when ...

77.86x -113,698.6 = 221.88x -411,278

297,580.2 = 144.02x . . . . . . . add 411278 -77.86x

2066.2 = x . . . . . . . divide by the coefficient of x

Based on this data we predict women's wages might catch up to men's in the year 2066, about 56 years from 2010.

_____

Alternate solution

In the 50 years from 1960 to 2010, the fraction of men's wages that women receive has increased from 23606/38907 ≈ 0.606729 to 34700/42800 ≈ 0.810748. That is a change of about 0.204 of men's wages in 50 years. The remaining fraction of 1-0.810748 = 0.189 might be expected to be wiped out in another (0.189/0.204)(50 years) = 46.4 years. That would be the year 2056.

The different results come from different assumptions. For the second solution, we assumed that the fraction improved linearly. Under the first assumption, that wages improved linearly, the fractional improvement is non-linear, and decreases over time.

_____

Additional comment

The usual assumption regarding things financial is that they change exponentially over time. If we use an exponential model, instead of a linear one, wage parity is reached in about 2046.

3 0

3 years ago