Answer:
Evening walk is shorter.
Step-by-step explanation:
We have been given that a nature center offers 2 guided walks. The morning walk is two-third mile. The evening walk is three-sixths mile. We are asked to find the shorter walk.
Let us compare both fractions by making the same denominator.
Upon making common denominator, we can see that two-thirds are equal to four sixths.
Since three-sixths is less than four-sixths, therefore, evening walk is shorter.
We will draw two rectangles, one with 6 sub-parts and other with three sub-parts.
We will shade 2 parts out of 3 sub-parts to represent 2/3 and shade 3 parts out of 6 sub-parts to represent 3/6.
Then we will further divide three sub-parts into 6 sub-parts as shown in the diagram that will represent 4/6.
Answer:
3(n + 2) > 0
Step-by-step explanation:
Work on a piece at a time.
"sum of a number and two": n + 2
"three times the sum of a number and two": 3(n + 2)
"three times the sum of a number and two is greater than zero": 3(n + 2) > 0
Answer: 3(n + 2) > 0
Answer: 4 inches
Step-by-step explanation:
Let the width of the pool in the drawing be represented by x.
Since scale drawing of a pool has scale of 1 in :4 ft and the actual pool is 16 ft wide, this can be represented in an equation as:
1/4 = x/16
Cross multiply
4 × x = 1 × 16
4x = 16
x = 16/4
x = 4
Therefore, the pool representation in the drawing is 4 inches
Answer:
x=25
Step-by-step explanation:
5x-5+ 2x+10 =180
2x-5x = 10+5
3x= 15
x=5
5(5)-5+ 2(5) +10 =180
Answer:
c)The proof writer mentally assumed the conclusion. He wrote "suppose n is an arbitrary integer", but was really thinking "suppose n is an arbitrary integer, and suppose that for this n, there exists an integer k that satisfies n < k < n+2." Under those assumptions, it follows indeed that k must be n + 1, which justifies the word "therefore": but of course assuming the conclusion destroyed the validity of the proof.
Step-by-step explanation:
when we claim something as a hypothesis we can only conclude with therefore at the end of the proof. so assuming the conclusion nulify the proof from the beginning
