Answer
39 bills of 1$
16 bills of 10$
Step-by-step explanation:
x-nr of $1
y-nr of $10
x*1+y*10=199
x+y=55 , x=55-y
so I use the substitution method
(55-y)*1+10y=199
55+10y-y=199
-55 -55
9y=144
y=144/9
y=16
so x=55-16
x=39
verify 16*10+39*1=160+39=199
Answers:
- Part A) There is one pair of parallel sides
- Part B) (-3, -5/2) and (-1/2, 5/2)
====================================================
Explanation:
Part A
By definition, a trapezoid has exactly one pair of parallel sides. The other opposite sides aren't parallel. In this case, we'd need to prove that PQ is parallel to RS by seeing if the slopes are the same or not. Parallel lines have equal slopes.
------------------------
Part B
The midsegment has both endpoints as the midpoints of the non-parallel sides.
The midpoint of segment PS is found by adding the corresponding coordinates and dividing by 2.
x coord = (x1+x2)/2 = (-4+(-2))/2 = -6/2 = -3
y coord = (y1+y2)/2 = (-1+(-4))/2 = -5/2
The midpoint of segment PS is (-3, -5/2)
Repeat those steps to find the midpoint of QR
x coord = (x1+x2)/2 = (-2+1)/2 = -1/2
y coord = (x1+x2)/2 = (3+2)/2 = 5/2
The midpoint of QR is (-1/2, 5/2)
Join these midpoints up to form the midsegment. The midsegment is parallel to PQ and RS.
... I don’t either... hold on lemme try I will be back soon I’m doing the problem
Hi,
To solve this problem, Let us take the LCM of 10 and 16 which will come 80.
Now suppose the cost price of 10 tables =₹n CP of 80 tables will be ₹ 8n
According to the question, CP of 10 tables is equal to the SP of 16 tables, then
the SP of 16 tables will also be ₹ n.
So, SP of 80 tables will be ₹ 5n
So, Loss = CP-SP
→ 8n - 5n = ₹ 3n
Loss%= (3n×100)/8n
Loss%= 37.5%.
Hence the correct answer will be a <u>loss of 37.5%.</u>
Answer: Choice A) An economic theory that is shared by the discipline of Psychology
Through the research I've found so far, the articles mention that economic choices have a psychological link. This is because economics is basically the study of human psychology (more or less) in terms of how to allocate resources and how best to use them. The law of diminishing marginal utility is basically the idea where the concept "more is always better" is simply not true. An example would be that you are at a restaurant and there's an endless buffet. The food isn't infinite and neither is the capacity of your stomach. After a certain point, you'll find that eating another burger isn't as satisfying as eating the first few burgers. You can think of it as a graph where the curve may start with a sharp increase, but eventually it levels off.
Side note: The term "affective habituation" may be used in psychology textbooks as something very similar to the law of diminishing marginal utility.
