Answer:
response variable- time required for water to turn to ice
control group- second freezer
explanatory variable- new formula
Step-by-step explanation:
Answer:
No, I don't think so.
Step-by-step explanation:
Answer:
She used inductive reasoning. (False)
She used the law of detachment. (True)
Her conclusion is valid. (True)
The statements can be represented as "if p, then q and if q, then r." (False)
Her conclusion is true. (True)
Step-by-step explanation:
p = Two lines are perpendicular
q = They intersect at Right angles.
Given: A and B are perpendicular
Conclusion: A and B intersect at right angle.
According to the law of detachment, There are two premises (statements that are accepted as true) and a conclusion. They must follow the pattern as shown below.
Statement 1: If p, then q.
Statement 2: p
Conclusion: q
In our case the pattern is followed. The truth of the premises logically guarantees the truth of the conclusion. So her conclusion is true and valid.
Answer:
x = 10
y = 3
Step-by-step explanation:
Given
2x - 6y = 2
x + 6y = 28
Add both equations
2x + x -6y + 6y = 2 + 28
3x = 30
Divide both sides by 3
x = 30/3
x = 10
Substitute 10 for x in either equations to get y
Using equation 2 , we have
x + 6y = 28
10 + 6y = 28
Subtract 10 from both sides
10 - 10 + 6y = 28 - 10
6y = 18
Divide both sides by by 6
y = 18/6
y = 3
Therefore
x = 10
y = 3
