All categories

1 year ago

0.01234567901 as a fraction

Mathematics

1 answer:

balu736 [363]1 year ago

6 0

Answer: 1234567901 /100000000000

Step-by-step explanation:

Convert the decimal number to a fraction by placing the decimal number over a power of ten. Since there are 11 numbers to the right of the decimal point, place the decimal number over 10 ∧11 ( 100000000000 ) . Next, add the whole number to the left of the decimal.

1234567901 /100000000000

You might be interested in

In a statistics class, 10 scores were randomly selected with the following results: 74, 73, 77, 77, 71, 68, 65, 77, 67, 66. What

julia-pushkina [17]

Answer:

The 65th percentile is between 73 and 74

Step-by-step explanation:

Rearrange the ungrouped data in ascending order: 65,66,67,68,71,73,74,77,77,77

The 65th percentile is 65/100 of N ( N = 10) = 65/100 × 10 = 6.5

The 65th percentile is the 6.5th term. The 6th term is 73 and the 7th term is 74, the 6.5th term is between the 6th and 7th term

The 65th percentile is between 73 and 74

4 0

2 years ago

Read 2 more answers

Three friends are buying seashells at the gift shop on the beach. Melanie buys 2 seashells for $0.80. Rosi buys 5 seashells for

bulgar [2K]

Answer:

Step-by-step explanation:

6 0

1 year ago

A tank contains 8000 L of pure water. Brine that contains 35 g of salt per liter of water is pumped into the tank at a rate of 2

OleMash [197]

Answer:

The concentration of salt in the tank approaches $35 \mathrm{g} / \mathrm{L},$

Step-by-step explanation:

Data provide in the question:

Water contained in the tank = 8000 L

Salt per litre contained in Brine = 35 g/L

Rate of pumping water into the tank = 25 L/min

Concentration of salt $\lim _{t \rightarrow \infty} C(t)=\lim _{t \rightarrow \infty} \frac{35 t}{320+t}$

Now,

Dividing both numerator and denominator by $t$ , we have

$\lim _{t \rightarrow \infty} \frac{\frac{1}{t} 35 t}{\frac{1}{t}(320+t)}=\lim _{t \rightarrow \infty} \frac{35}{\frac{320}{t}+1}=35$

Here,

The concentration of salt in the tank approaches $35 \mathrm{g} / \mathrm{L},$

3 0

2 years ago

Elsa tries to solve the following equation, and determines there is no solution. Is she correct? Explain.

Vlad [161]

Elsa's answer is incorrect since there is a solution of the given equation. In the given logarithmic problem, we need to simplify the problem by transposing log2(3x+5) in the opposite side. The equation will now be log2x-log2(3x+5)=4. Using properties of logarithm, we further simplify the problem into a new form log (2x/6x+10)=4. Then transform the equation into base form 10^4=(2x/6x+10) and proceed in solving for x value which is equal to 1.667.

3 0

2 years ago

Read 2 more answers

Ebola has an Ro of 2. How<br> many third-wave cases can<br> doctors expect?

stellarik [79]

Answer:

4 I guess

Step-by-step explanation:

Because

3-1=2

2^2=2*2=4

4 0

2 years ago