Answer:
Bolded below are the answers
Step-by-step explanation:
4568 ÷ 8
(4000 ÷ 8) + (560 ÷ 8) + (8 ÷ 8)
500 + 70 + 1
571
Hope this helps!
Answer:
The expression simplifies to 
.
Step-by-step explanation:
The expression
can be rearranged and written as
In this form the 
terms in the numerator and in the denominator cancel to give
The 
are present both in the numerator and in the denominator, so they also cancel, and the fraction 
simplifies to 
, so finally our expression becomes:
Which is our answer:)
Answer: First of all, we will add the options.
A. Yes, because 3 inches falls above the maximum value of lengths in the sample.
B. Yes, because the regression equation is based on a random sample.
C. Yes, because the association between length and weight is positive.
D. No, because 3 inches falls above the maximum value of lengths in the sample.
E. No, because there may not be any 3-inch fish of this species in the pond.
The correct option is D.
Step-by-step explanation: It would not be appropriate to use the model to predict the weight of species that is 3 inches long because 3 inches falls above the maximum value of lengths in the sample.
As we can see from the question, the model only accounts for species that are within the range of 0.75 to 1.35 inches in length, and species smaller or larger than that length have not been taken into consideration. Therefore the model can not be used to predict the weights of fishes not with the range accounted for.
25x^2 = 16
divide each side by 25
x^2 = 16/25
take the square root of each side
sqrt (x^2) = +- sqrt(16/25)
x = +- sqrt(16)/sqrt(25)
x = +- 4/5
x = 4/5, - 4/5
