Hi there! 9.125 * 10^-3 is definitely less than 9.125 * 10^2, because when it comes to negative powers of 10, the numbers are decimals. 10^-3 equals 0.001 or one thousandths in word form. 10^2 is 100. When solving for the answers. 0.009125 is less than 912.5. When 912.5 is divided by 0.009125 912.5 is 100^5 or 100,000 times greater than 0.009125. The answer is that 9.125 * 10^-3 is 100,000 (100^5) times less than 9.125 * 10^2.
Answer:
(- 7, - 4 )
Step-by-step explanation:
Given a quadratic in standard form
y = ax² + bx + c ( a ≠ 0 )
Then the x- coordinate of the turning point is
x = - 
y = x² + 14x + 45 ← is in standard form
with a = 1, b = 14 , then
x = -
= - 7
Substitute x = - 7 into the equation and evaluate for y
y = (- 7)² + 14(- 7) + 45 = 49 - 98 + 45 = - 4
coordinates of turning point = (- 7, - 4 )
Answer
X1= 3-2 root3 x2= 1 x3=5 x4= 3 +2 root 3
First swap the sides then simplify the equation
Collect like terms
Move all the expression to the left to equal 0
Then collect like terms again
Reorder the terms from ^2 to ^4
Factor the expression
Change the signs
Separate into possible cases
Then sold the equation to equal 0
Then check solutions by subbing them in as x
Then you should have 4 perfect answers
Answer:28.26
Step-by-step explanation:9 x 3.14
Answer:
c)The proof writer mentally assumed the conclusion. He wrote "suppose n is an arbitrary integer", but was really thinking "suppose n is an arbitrary integer, and suppose that for this n, there exists an integer k that satisfies n < k < n+2." Under those assumptions, it follows indeed that k must be n + 1, which justifies the word "therefore": but of course assuming the conclusion destroyed the validity of the proof.
Step-by-step explanation:
when we claim something as a hypothesis we can only conclude with therefore at the end of the proof. so assuming the conclusion nulify the proof from the beginning