Answer:
1. 2(3x−2)(2x−3)
2. 3(3x+1)(2x+5)
3. 2(4x+1)(2x−5)
4. 4(2x+1)(2x+7)
5. 5(3x+1)(2x−5)
6. 3(3x−7)(2x+1)
7. 3(5x+3)(3x−2)
8. 2(7x−2)(2x−5)
9. 2(7x−3)(2x−3)
10. 4(5x−11)(2x+1)
11. 5(x−2)(x+12)
12. (x−1)(x−8)
15. x=1 or x=4
Step-by-step explanation:
1. Factor 12x2−26x+12
12x2−26x+12
=2(3x−2)(2x−3)
2. 3(3x+1)(2x+5)
3. Factor 16x2−36x−10
16x2−36x−10
=2(4x+1)(2x−5)
4. Factor 16x2+64x+28
16x2+64x+28
=4(2x+1)(2x+7)
5. Factor 30x2−65x−25
30x2−65x−25
=5(3x+1)(2x−5)
6. Factor 18x2−33x−21
18x2−33x−21
=3(3x−7)(2x+1)
7. Factor 45x2−3x−18
45x2−3x−18
=3(5x+3)(3x−2)
8. Factor 28x2−78x+20
28x2−78x+20
=2(7x−2)(2x−5)
9. Factor 28x2−54x+18
28x2−54x+18
=2(7x−3)(2x−3)
10. Factor 40x2−68x−44
40x2−68x−44
=4(5x−11)(2x+1)
11. Factor 5x2+50x−120
5x2+50x−120
=5(x−2)(x+12)
12. Let's factor x2−9x+8
x2−9x+8
The middle number is -9 and the last number is 8.
Factoring means we want something like
(x+_)(x+_)
Which numbers go in the blanks?
We need two numbers that...
Add together to get -9
Multiply together to get 8
Can you think of the two numbers?
Try -1 and -8:
-1+-8 = -9
-1*-8 = 8
Fill in the blanks in
(x+_)(x+_)
with -1 and -8 to get...
(x-1)(x-8)
15. Let's solve your equation step-by-step.
(x−2)(x−3)=2
Step 1: Simplify both sides of the equation.
x2−5x+6=2
Step 2: Subtract 2 from both sides.
x2−5x+6−2=2−2
x2−5x+4=0
Step 3: Factor left side of equation.
(x−1)(x−4)=0
Step 4: Set factors equal to 0.
x−1=0 or x−4=0
x=1 or x=4
Sorry I wasn't able to do 13 and 14 but hope this helps! :)
T(z)=z-8
T(-2)=-2-8 therefore
T(-2)=-10
Hope this helps.
32 because 8 inches x 4 sequins per inch is 32 sequins
Hope i helped
Answer:
fail to reject the null hypothesis
Step-by-step explanation:
Based on the information provided I would fail to reject the null hypothesis. This is because the Miles per gallon that the independent testing firm has concluded for the car nearly matches the car's MPG claim. The difference being 0.1 . Since the standard deviation is 1.1 for this test, this means that the average falls perfectly within this range and makes the data very compelling. Combine this with a very low level of significance, I would say that the claim is backed by the data.
The answer for this question is A.
