Could 10.5\text{ cm}, 8.0\text{ cm},10.5 cm,8.0 cm,10, point, 5, start text, space, c, m, end text, comma, 8, point, 0, start te
Reptile [31]
Answer:
Yes, 10.5 cm, 8.0 cm and 4.0 cm can be the side lengths of a triangle.
Step-by-step explanation:
We have been given three lengths as 10.5 cm, 8.0 cm and 4.0 cm. We are asked to determine whether these side can be the side lengths of a triangle.
We will use triangle inequality theorem to solve our given problem.
Triangle inequality theorem states that sum of two sides of a triangle must be greater than 3rd side. Using triangle inequality theorem we will get 3 inequalities as:
True
True
True
Since all the three side lengths satisfy triangle inequality theorem, therefore, 10.5 cm, 8.0 cm and 4.0 cm can be the side lengths of a triangle.
Integrate <span>f ''(x) = −2 + 36x − 12x2 with respect to x:
f '(x) = -2x + (36/2)x^2 - (12/3)x^3 + c. Find c by letting x = 0 and using f(0)=8.
Then f '(0) = -2x + 18x^2 - 4x^3 + c = 18 (which was given).
Then -0 + 0 - 0 + c = 18, so c = 18 and
f '(x) = </span>-2x + 18x^2 - 4x^3 + 18.
Go through the same integration process to find f(x).
Answer: Third option.
Step-by-step explanation:
Let be "x" the approximate actual width (in feet) of the car.
Based on the information provided in the exercise, you know that the scale of the model car is this one:
Which can be written as a fraction:
Therefore, if you know that the width of the model car is 2.3 inches, you can set up the following proportion:
Finally, you must solve for "x" in order to find its value.
So you get the following result:
Equation for Liz:
L = 8n
Equation for Andy:
A = 8n + 35
Step-by-step explanation:
Let the no. of necklace be 'n'
Cost per necklace= $8
Equation for Liz:
L = 8n
Because Liz sells only necklace for $8 each
Equation for Andy:
A = 8n + 35
Because Andy sells each necklace for $8 and she sold the bracelets for $35
<u>Answer:</u>
<u>1. A. You allow the passenger to board his flight when the passenger has a weapon.</u>
<u>2. B. You select the passenger for further inspection when the passenger has no weapon.</u>
<u>Explanation:</u>
1. Remember, a Type I error in simple words means that the assumption "the passenger has a weapon" (null hypothesis) is <em>actually true,</em> but the airport security screener <em>incorrectly concluded it is false. </em>In other words, he assumed the passenger had no weapon and allowed the passenger to board his flight <u>when he actually did have one.</u>
<em>2. While, </em><em>a </em><em>Type II error </em><em>means that </em>the assumption "the passenger has a weapon" (null hypothesis) is <em>actually false, </em>but the airport security screener <em>incorrectly concluded it is true. </em>In other words, he assumed the passenger had a weapon and selected the passenger for further inspection <u>when he actually didn't have one.</u>
