Can anybody help me with this? Use this graph of f to find the solutions to f(x) = 0.

Write the number 4 4 as a product of prime factors.

Paladinen [302]

The answer would be
2 x 2 = 4

7 0

3 years ago

Jasmine purchased a laptop worth $1,500 in 2007. It loses its value by %32 each year. What is the value of the laptop in 2010? R

Lunna [17]

Answer:

$471.65

Step-by-step explanation:

-The value of the laptop after each year is calculated by the formula:

$P_t=P_o(1-d)^t$

where:

$P_t$ is the value at time t

$P_o$ is the initial value

$d$ is the rate of depreciation

$t$ is the time

#We substitute the values to solve for the value after 3 years(2010-2007=3):

$P_t=P_o(1-d)^t\\\\=1500(1-0.32)^3\\\\=\$471.65$

Hence, the value of the laptop in 2010 is $471.65

3 0

3 years ago

The manager of an automobile dealership is considering a new bonus plan designed to increase sales volume. Currently, the mean s

Tcecarenko [31]

Answer:

The most appropriate null hypothesis for this situation is

$H_0$ : The mean sales volume is equal to 24.

the most appropriate alternative hypothesis for this situation is

$H_a$ : The mean sales volume is greater than 24.

Step-by-step explanation:

The null hypothesis $H_0$ is the fact that is established and consider as true fact.

Since the established mean sales volume is 24 automobiles per month this should be considered as the null hypothesis.

So, the most appropriate null hypothesis for this situation is

$H_0$ : The mean sales volume is equal to 24

The alternative hypothesis is a fact that intends to reject or refute the null by collecting data that could contradict it.

In this case, since the manager wants to conduct a research study to see whether the new bonus plan increases sales volume, he wants to see if the data collected after the new bonus plan can show that the new average is greater than the established one.

So, the most appropriate alternative hypothesis for this situation is

$H_a$ : The mean sales volume is greater than 24.

To try and prove that $H_a$ shows enough evidence as to assure the new plan actually increases sales volume, he must fix a significance level $\alpha$ , for example 0.1 or 0.05, which gives the probability that $H_a$ is not wrong in case that it rejects $H_0$ .

This confidence level defines an $\alpha$ -score $z_\alpha$ which is a point such that the area under the normal curve N(0;1) to the right of $z_\alpha$ is less than $\alpha$ .

In this case we considered the right side because you want to see the new average is greater than the established one.

If the z-score obtained through the sample is greater than $z_\alpha$ then you can say the new bonus actually increases sales.

If the z-score obtained through the sample is less than or equals to $z_\alpha$ then you do not have enough evidence showing that the new bonus actually increases sales.

6 0

3 years ago

Please please helppp answer correctly !!!!!!!!!! Will mark Brianliest !!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!

marusya05 [52]

Answer:

holy.... that's a lot of variables.

4t+2s+w+u+x+v

4 0

3 years ago

Kit bought a soft drink and a sandwich for $9.00. What was the price of each if the sandwich cost 3.5 times as much as the soft

Aleks04 [339]

The answer woukd be 3.00 u guess math is my worst subject dont rage if it wrong

6 0

3 years ago