*the table being referred to is attached below
Answer:
The table does not show a proportional relationship between variable g and h.
Step-by-step explanation:
For a proportional relationship to exist between two variables, there must be a constant, of which serves like a unit rate, when comparing two variables.
Thus, in the table attached below, there is no obvious constant of proportionality between variable g and variable h.
Thus,
≠
≠ 
Answer:
x = 1
Step-by-step explanation:
There are a couple of ways to solve this. One is to graph the left side of the equation, graph the right side of the equation, and look for the point where those graphs intersect. It is at x = 1. The first attached graph shows this solution.
__
Another method for solving such an equation is to subtract one side from the other and look for the value of x that makes the resulting expression zero.
(-2x +3) -(-3(-x) -2) = 0
A graphing calculator doesn't need to have this simplified. If it is simplified, it becomes ...
-5x +5 = 0
So, the graphed line is y = -5x+5. Its x-intercept is x=1, the solution of the original equation. The graph of this is shown in the second attachment.
Answer:
4/675
Step-by-step explanation:
There can be 90 two-digit numbers ranging from 10 to 99. There will be
90 x 90= 8100 possibilities of randomly selecting and combining 2 entire two-digit numbers, if we find ax b to be distinct from bx a. When 10 is first chosen, there may be 9 two-digit numbers that could be combined within the required range for a product When 11 is chosen first, then the second two-digit number has 9 possibilities. 12 has seven options; 13 has six options; 14 has five options; 15 has four options; 16 has three options; 17 has two options; 18 has 2 options; and 19 has one option. It provides us 48 total choices so the likelihood that the combination of two randomly chosen two-digit whole numbers is one of theses these possibilities is thus 48/8100 = 4/675.