Answer:
The growth rate for the period was of 17.86%.
Step-by-step explanation:
To find the growth rate as a percent, we multiply the change by 100, and divide by the initial value.
A house cost $112,000 in 2010. By the year 2015, the house had a value of $132,000.
Change: 132 - 112 = 20
Initial value: 112
Growth rate as a percent:
20*100/112 = 17.86%
The growth rate for the period was of 17.86%.
Answer:
Step-by-step explanation:
Answer:
Step-by-step explanation:
Given that
Slope m=-3
A point (x, y)=(4,-2)
Equation of a line can generally be written as
y=mx+c
Where, m is the slope
And c is the intercept on y-axis
Since we are given m=-3
Then, y=mx+c becomes
y=-3x+c
To get c, let substitute the point given, i.e x=4 and y=-2
y=-3x+c
-2=-3(4)+c
-2=-12+c
-2+12=c
c=-2+12
c=10
y=mx+c, then m=-3 and c=10
Then, the equation the line becomes y = -3x + 10
This is the required line equation
The second matrix ![\left[\begin{array}{ccc}-6&3&12\\0&15&-24\end{array}\right]](https://tex.z-dn.net/?f=%5Cleft%5B%5Cbegin%7Barray%7D%7Bccc%7D-6%263%2612%5C%5C0%2615%26-24%5Cend%7Barray%7D%5Cright%5D)
represents the triangle dilated by a scale factor of 3.
Step-by-step explanation:
Step 1:
To calculate the scale factor for any dilation, we divide the coordinates after dilation by the same coordinated before dilation.
The coordinates of a vertice are represented in the column of the matrix. Since there are three vertices, there are 2 rows with 3 columns. The order of the matrices is 2 × 3.
Step 2:
If we form a matrix with the vertices (-2,0), (1,5), and (4,-8), we get
![\left[\begin{array}{ccc}-2&1&4\\0&5&-8\end{array}\right]](https://tex.z-dn.net/?f=%5Cleft%5B%5Cbegin%7Barray%7D%7Bccc%7D-2%261%264%5C%5C0%265%26-8%5Cend%7Barray%7D%5Cright%5D)
The scale factor is 3, so if we multiply the above matrix with 3 throughout, we will get the matrix that represents the vertices of the triangle after dilation.
Step 3:
The matrix that represents the triangle after dilation is given by
![3\left[\begin{array}{ccc}-2&1&4\\0&5&-8\end{array}\right] = \left[\begin{array}{ccc}3(-2)&3(1)&3(4)\\3(0)&3(5)&3(-8)\end{array}\right] = \left[\begin{array}{ccc}-6&3&12\\0&15&-24\end{array}\right]](https://tex.z-dn.net/?f=3%5Cleft%5B%5Cbegin%7Barray%7D%7Bccc%7D-2%261%264%5C%5C0%265%26-8%5Cend%7Barray%7D%5Cright%5D%20%3D%20%5Cleft%5B%5Cbegin%7Barray%7D%7Bccc%7D3%28-2%29%263%281%29%263%284%29%5C%5C3%280%29%263%285%29%263%28-8%29%5Cend%7Barray%7D%5Cright%5D%20%3D%20%5Cleft%5B%5Cbegin%7Barray%7D%7Bccc%7D-6%263%2612%5C%5C0%2615%26-24%5Cend%7Barray%7D%5Cright%5D)
This is the second option.
Answer:
No, the reason is because -3/4 is farther away from 0 on the number line while -1/4 is closer to 0. Therefore, -1/4 > -3/4 is the correct answer
Step-by-step explanation:
