9514 1404 393
Answer:
34.5 square meters
Step-by-step explanation:
We assume you want to find the area of the shaded region. (The actual question is not visible here.)
The area of the triangle (including the rectangle) is given by the formula ...
A = 1/2bh
The figure shows the base of the triangle is 11 m, and the height is 1+5+3 = 9 m. So, the triangle area is ...
A = (1/2)(11 m)(9 m) = 49.5 m^2
The rectangle area is the product of its length and width:
A = LW
The figure shows the rectangle is 5 m high and 3 m wide, so its area is ...
A = (5 m)(3 m) = 15 m^2
The shaded area is the difference between the triangle area and the rectangle area:
shaded area = 49.5 m^2 - 15 m^2 = 34.5 m^2
The shaded region has an area of 34.5 square meters.
Answer:
The two points solutions to the system of equations are: (2, 3) and (-1,6)
Step-by-step explanation:
These system of equations consists of a parabola and a line. We need to find the points at which they intersect:

Since we were able to factor out the quadratic expression, we can say that the x-values solution of the system are:
x = 2 and x = -1
Now, the associated y values we can get using either of the original equations for the system. We pick to use the linear equation for example:
when x = 2 then 
when x= -1 then 
Then the two points solutions to the system of equations are: (2, 3) and (-1,6)
thats funny!! love that!!!! please mark me
Answer:
Option A, there is not sufficient sample evidence to conclude that the full-time placement rate is now less than 87% because the p-value is greater than 0.05.
Step-by-step explanation:
Here the Null hypothesis would be
H0: 87% of the graduates find full-time employment in their field within the first year of graduation
H1: Less than 87% of the graduates find full-time employment in their field within the first year of graduation
Here the p values is 0.07.
Since the p value is greater than 0.05, there are not enough evidences to reject the hull hypothesis.
Hence, option A is correct