Answer:
Step-by-step explanation:
Correct steps to find the value of 'a' should be,
Braulio's synthetic division should be,
-1 | 1 5 a -3 11
<u> -1 -4 (4 - a) (a - 1) </u>
1 4 (a - 4) (1 - a) (a + 10)
Here remainder is (a + 10).
So (a + 10) = 17 ⇒ a = 7
Braulio Incorrectly found a value of 'a' because he should have used (-1) instead of 1.
Zahra's calculation by remainder theorem should be,
p(x) = x⁴ + 5x³ + ax² - 3x + 11
p(-1) = (-1)⁴ + 5(-1)³ + a(-1)² - 3(-1) + 11
= 1 - 5 + a + 3 + 11
= (a + 10)
Since, remainder of the solution is 17,
(a + 10) = 17 ⇒ a = 7
Zahra incorrectly found the value of 'a' because she incorrectly solved the powers to (-1).
First we need to find out what kind
of logarithm rule is given, the given is logarithm product rule which states
that a log of a product is equal to the sum of the log of the first base and
the log of the second base.
By:
= log (1.37 x 10⁹) =
log (1.37) + log (10⁹)
= log (1.37) + 9
= 9 + log (1.37)
In the meantime, 1.37 is between
1 and 10 its logarithm will be between 0 and 1. Thus, the value of log (1.37 x 10⁹)
falls between 9 and 10 because when you compose a scientific notation you will
always have a number among 1 and 10 by 10 to some power. That power tells you
the integer part of the logarithm.
<span> </span>
Answer:
Using the ratio table the dogs weight is:
30 pounds = 13.5 kilograms
Step-by-step explanation:
For this case we have the following conversion:
20 pounds = 9 kilograms
To use the table what we must do is find another relationship that allows us to find the weight in kilograms for 30 pounds.
For example, half the weight in pounds is half the weight in kilograms.
Therefore, the given conversion is:
10 pounds = 4.5 kilograms
So, for 30 pounds, we multiply this last ratio obtained by three on both sides:
30 pounds = 13.5 kilograms
Then, the table is:
Pounds 10 20 30
The study of explanatory or independent differences based on the dependent variable is a simple statistical method. The correlation between two variables is researched in which only the explanatory variable of them would be present, and the further discussion can be defined as follows:
For point (i):
- The log(distances) seem to be optimistic, and their valuation is 0.312, which also means that the cost of a house will rise even as the distance increases.
- In this, the certainly is what everybody expects the better the house from the sewage treatment is from a hygienic viewpoint.
For point (ii):
- In this regard, we cannot use straightforward regression, even as non-biased price estimation might not even be provided.
- The price-distance relationship here is not so much linear.
For point (iii):
- Several factors influence the house's price, the biggest contributor is house length, market nearness or public areas, number of rooms, etc.
- Thus the only influence is not the mere distance from the incinerator. It's one of the factors affecting housing pricing.
- The proximity of markets and places can be connected to the distance from the crematorium.
- However, factors such as house size and the number of stories aren't related to the distance from the incineration plant.
Learn more:
brainly.com/question/19729277
The picture in the attached figure
we know that
a) <span>
∠1 and ∠5are congruent-----> by corresponding anglesb) </span>∠3 and ∠8------> supplementary angles (∠3 + ∠8=180°)
<span>are not congruent
c)</span>∠6 and ∠4------> supplementary angles (∠6 + ∠4=180°)
are not congruent
d) ∠8 and ∠2------> supplementary angles (∠8 + ∠2=180°)
are not congruent
e) ∠4 and ∠7-----> supplementary angles (∠4 + ∠7=180°)
are not congruent
