Answer:
The other side was decreased to approximately .89 times its original size, meaning it was reduced by approximately 11%
Step-by-step explanation:
We can start with the basic equation for the area of a rectangle:
l × w = a
And now express the changes described above as an equation, using "p" as the amount that the width is changed:
(l × 1.1) × (w × p) = a × .98
Now let's rearrange both of those equations to solve for a / l. Starting with the first and easiest:
w = a/l
now the second one:
1.1l × wp = 0.98a
wp = 0.98a / 1.1l
1.1 wp / 0.98 = a/l
Now with both of those equalling a/l, we can equate them:
1.1 wp / 0.98 = w
We can then divide both sides by w, eliminating it
1.1wp / 0.98w = w/w
1.1p / 0.98 = 1
And solve for p
1.1p = 0.98
p = 0.98 / 1.1
p ≈ 0.89
So the width is scaled by approximately 89%
We can double check that too. Let's multiply that by the scaled length and see if we get the two percent decrease:
.89 × 1.1 = 0.979
That should be 0.98, and we're close enough. That difference of 1/1000 is due to rounding the 0.98 / 1.1 to .89. The actual result of that fraction is 0.89090909... if we multiply that by 1.1, we get exactly .98.
Answer:
imma look this up rq
Step-by-step explanation:
An estimate helps you place the decimal point because when you place 3.7 and 5.1 to multiply you have to count how many spaces of numbers there are. So the answer is 18.87.
Answer:
There's one 0.
Step-by-step explanation:
Because I multiplied it and there's only one 0.
Answer:
It is not C got it wrong.
Step-by-step explanation:
