Answer:
Statements 2 and 3.
Step-by-step explanation:
The first statement is impossible since you cannot have half a person. The last statement is also incorrect, because it would imply that the total number of students in the class is -29. The second statement is correct, if you assume that x and y represent either the number of male or female students. The third statement is possible, and the numbers add up to 29. Finally, the fourth statement is impossible because it would imply that the class had negative male students. Hope this helps!
Answer:
648
Step-by-step explanation:
Running this in Python, with the code as follows,
import math
cur_numbers = [0] * 3
num = 0
for i in range(100, 1000):
cur_numbers[2] = i % 10
i = math.floor(i/10)
cur_numbers[1] = i % 10
i = math.floor(i/10)
cur_numbers[0] = i % 10
if(len(set(cur_numbers)) == 3):
num += 1
print(cur_numbers)
print(num), we get 648 as our answer.
Another way to solve this is as follows:
There are 9 possibilities for the hundreds digit (1-9). Then, there are 10 possibilities for the tens digit, but we subtract 1 because it can't be the 1 same digit as the hundreds digit. For the ones digit, there are 10 possibilities, but we subtract 1 because it can't be the same as the hundreds digit and another 1 because it can't be the same as the tens digit. Multiplying these out, we have
9 possibilities for the hundreds digit x 9 possibilities for the tens digit x 8 possibilities for the ones digit = 648
Answer:
1/5
Step-by-step explanation:
Use Pythagoras theorem
Answer & Step-by-step explanation:
3x²
This term represents a monomial expression. Mono- means one. This term is by itself. It has no other term added or subtracted to it.
The coefficient of this term is 3 because it is the number that the variable is connected to.
There are no constants because this is a monomial expression.
Answer:
Step-by-step explanation:
"The graph of f(x) is a horizontal compression of the graph of the parent function" is true; the graph will appear to be narrower than that of y = |x|. I would prefer to state "the graph of f(x) exhibits vertical stretching of the original (parent) function graph."
