1.5cm 30 cm sinplyed

Someone please help me.

sp2606 [1]

None of the above? Sorry of this is incorrect im 90% sure though

3 0

3 years ago

Solve the following expression when<br> v = 10 and e= 5<br> 2v ÷ e + 3

Montano1993 [528]

Hello!

Answer:

5/2 or 2.5

Step-by-step explanation:

<em>Plug in the numbers for v and e </em>

2(10)÷5+3

20÷8

5/2 or 2.5

Hope this helps!

6 0

3 years ago

Situation:

stepan [7]

Answer:

t = 6162 years

Step-by-step explanation:

This equation takes the form of

$N=N_{0}e^{kt}$

We are given everything but the amount of C-14 at time t = 0. But we can figure it out from the info we ARE given. We are told that when the spear head is found it contains 54% of its original amount of C-14. Notice we are dealing in percents. If 54% remains when it is found, it started out with 100% of its amount. That's our N value. Filling in:

$100=54e^{.0001t}$

Our goal is to get that t down from the exponential position that it is currently in. To do that we will need to eventually take the natural log of both sides, because ln's and e's "undo" each other, much like squaring "undoes" a square, or dividing "undoes" multiplication. So we take the natural log of both sides. On the right side, notice that when we take the natural log, the e disappears; it's "undone", gone. Before that, though, we will simplify by dividing both sides by 54. 100/54 = 1.851851852. So, altogether...

$ln(1.851851852)=.0001t$

Simplifying by plugging the log of that number into our calculator, we get

.6161861395 = .0001t and

t = 6161.8613

Rounding to the nearest year, t = 6162 years

6 0

4 years ago

Find the value of c 3-2(1 + 6c) = -35

Alex777 [14]

Answer:

C = 3

Step-by-step explanation:

By using the distributive property, we multiply 1 and 6c inside the brackets by -2. This gives us 3 -2 - 12c = -35. Next, we subtract 2 from 3, giving us 1 - 12c = -35. We will now subtract 1 from both sides, leaving us with -12c = -36, or simply 12c = 36. Finally, we divide by 12, giving us C = 3. I hope this helps!

7 0

2 years ago

Why is it necessary to use the absolute value of the difference when finding the distance on a number line, but not necessary wh

padilas [110]

Remember that the distance on a number line is given by the formula: $d=|x_{2}-x_{1}|$
where
$d$ is the distance between the points.
$x_{2}$ is the second point in the number line.
$x_{1}$ is the first point in the number line.
Now, suppose we are trying to find the distance between the points -1 and -5; our first point is -1, so $x_{1}=-1$ , and our second point is $-5$ , so $x_{2}=-5$ . Suppose we are going to find the distance between the two point without using absolute value:
$d=x_{2}-x_{1}$
$d=-5-(-1)$
$d=-5+1$
$d=-4$
Look what we have here, a negative distance! Since distances cannot be negative, we must use absolute value to always get postie distances between two point on a umber line:
$d=|x_{2}-x_{1}|$
$d=|-5-(-1)|$
$d=|-5+1|$
$d=|-4|$
$d=4$

Now, the distance between two coordinates on a plane is given by the formula: $d= \sqrt{(x_{2}-x_{1})^2+(y_{2}-y_{1})^2}$
$where$
$d$ is the distance between the two coordinates
$(x_{1},y_{2})$ are the coordinates of the first point
$(x_{2},y_{2})$ are the coordinates of the second point
Notice that $(x_{2}-x_{1})^2$ and $(y_{2}-y_{1})^2$ are squared, so it doesn't matter if we get a negative distance because a negative number raised to an even power (like 2) is always positive; therefore we don't need absolute value in this case because we won't ever get a negative distance.

7 0

3 years ago