Options:
a. Nikki's proposed placement will light a greater area than Dylan's placement.
b. Dylan's proposed placement will light a greater area than Nikki's placement.
c. Both proposed placements will light the same sized area.
d. Nikki's proposed placement will light more than half the yard.
e. Dylan's proposed placement will light more than half the yard.
f. Dylan's proposed placement will light exactly half of the yard.
g. Nikki's proposed placement will light less than half of the yard.
Answer:
C) Both proposed placements will light the same sized area.
F) Dylan's proposed placement will light exactly half of the yard.
Step-by-step explanation:
The area of a triangle is (base x height) / 2, and both lights illuminate the same base and height = (60 x 38) / 2 = 1,140 sq ft
Both Dylan's and Nikki's proposed placement will lit exactly half of the yard. The yard's total area = 60 x 38 = 2,280 sq ft, which is twice the area lit by the lights.
Answer:
5 hours
Step-by-step explanation:
Our goal here is 3 F because 82+3=85
Ok so you start at 82. For example, you can do 0.6×1=0.6 (no)
0.6×2=1.2 (no)
0.6×3=1.8 (no)
0.6×4=2.4 (no)
0.6×5=3 (yes)
82°+3°=85°
Answer:
30degrees
Step-by-step explanation:
Given
Exterior angle m<CDE = 7x - 19 degrees
interior angles are
m<BCD = 2x - 1
m<DBC = x+10
Since the sum of the interior angles is equal to the exterior, hence;
2x - 1 + x+10 = 7x - 19
3x + 9 = 7x - 19
3x - 7x = -19 - 9
-4x = -28
x = 28/4
x = 7
Get m<CDE
m<CDE = 7x - 19
m<CDE = 7(7) - 19
m<CDE = 49 - 19
m<CDE = 30degrees
Each time they assume the sum<span> is </span>rational<span>; however, upon rearranging the terms of their equation, they get a contradiction (that an </span>irrational number<span> is equal to a </span>rational number<span>). Since the assumption that the </span>sum of a rational<span> and </span>irrational number<span> is </span>rational<span>leads to a contradiction, the </span>sum<span> must be </span>irrational<span>.</span>
Answer:
30%
Step-by-step explanation: