Marking brainliest



What do you thinks this means and why does it matter

Answer:

1000

Step-by-step explanation:

Answer:$1000

Step-by-step explanation:

Divide 1200 by 6 then multiply that number by 5

=================================================

Explanation:

Since 300 is a multiple of some number, this means that mystery number is a factor of 300.

So for instance, she could have picked 60 since 60*5 = 300. Or she could have picked 50 because 50*6 = 300.

To find out if you have a factor or not, divide the 300 over each answer choice. If you get a whole number, then it is a factor.

Choices B through D lead to whole number results, which shows that the numbers 50, 60 and 75 are factors of 300. Flipping things around, this means that 300 is a multiple of 50, 60, and 75.

Only 45 is the one that isn't a factor of 300, which means that 300 is not a multiple of 45.

--------------

Another way to see this is to list out the multiples of 45

and we don't land on 300. The closest we get is 315.

In contrast, let's list out the multiples of 50

The value 300 is in the list, allowing us to cross off choice B. Choices C and D are similar.

Answer:

x= 0

y= 2

explanation in the picture attached (tap the image to view it fully)

Answer:

Step-by-step explanation:

A= h(x + 10)^2

27 = 4(x + 10)^2

(x + 10)^2 = 27/4

x + 10 = √27/2

x + 10 = 3√3/2

x = 3√3/2 - 10

= -7.40 to nearest hundredth.

Answer:

F. 30  G. 8

Step-by-step explanation:

F. 9 / 9 + 6 = 18 / BC

9 + 6 = 15

9 / 15 = 18 / BC

9 x 2 = 18

15 x 2 = 30

G. 9 / 6 = 12 / EC

9/6 reduces to 3/2

3/2 = 12/EC

3 x 4 = 12

2 x 4 = 8

.b- 15 = -12

b = 15 - 12

b = 3

. x - 5 = 7

x = 7 + 5

x = 12

. r + 6 = 11

r = 11 - 6

r = 5

. v/15 = 15

v = 15 × 15

v = 225

Answer:

3. b = 3

5. x = 12

7. r = 5

9. v = -225

Step-by-step explanation:

3. b - 15 = -12  

To get b by itself we have to add 15 to both sides.

b = 15-12

b = 3

5. x-5 = 7

To get x by itself we have to add 5 to both sides.

x = 5+7

x = 12

7. r + 6 = 11

To get r by itself we have to subtract 6 to both sides.

r = 11-6

r = 5

9. [tex]\frac{v}{15}[/tex] = -15

To get v by itself we have to multiply [tex]\frac{v}{15}[/tex] by its opposite reciprocal which is [tex]\frac{15}{1}[/tex]

v = -15(15)

v = -225

__________________________________________________________

Hope this helps!!

If I am wrong, please tell me, I enjoy learning from my mistakes:)

Answer:

n-1, n, n+1

Step-by-step explanation:

n - 1    +   n    +   n +1  = 3n

The middle number is n, the first is n-1 and the third is n+1

Based on the information given, the three consecutive numbers will be n-1, n, and n+1.

It should be noted that consecutive numbers simply mean the numbers that follow themselves in a particular order.

In this case, the three consecutive numbers will be n-1, n, and n+1. Their addition will be:

= n - 1 + n + n + 1

= 3n

Learn more about numbers on:

https://brainly.com/question/24732604

Answer:

300!! I think...

Step-by-step explanation:

30 x 10 = 300

If you divide .30 by 10.50, you get 30. So, you can buy 30 oranges for a total of 10.50 when each orange is .30.

Answer:

5 and 25

Step-by-step explanation:

let the son's age be x then the father's age is x + 20

In 5 years

son = x + 5 and father = x + 20 + 5 = x + 25

Then

x + 25 = 3(x + 5) ← father is three times as old as son

x + 25 = 3x + 15 ( subtract x from both sides )

25 = 2x + 15 ( subtract 15 from both sides )

10 = 2x ( divide both sides by 2 )

5 = x and x + 20 = 5 + 20 = 25

si=on is 5 and father is 25

Answer:

The son is 5 and the father is 25.

Step-by-step explanation:

We can do this using  Algebra.

Let the son be x years old.

Then the father's age is x + 20 years.

After 5 years the father's age is x + 25 and the son is x + 5 years.

So we can write the equation:

x + 25 = 3(x + 5)

x + 25 = 3x + 15

25 - 15 = 3x - x

10 = 2x

x = 5.

So the father's present age is 20 + 5 = 25 and the son is 5 years old.

Answer:

I believe the answer is 5

Answer:

C

Step-by-step explanation: looks right

dont  trust it though

Answer:

9

Step-by-step explanation:

pemdas

9-3÷1/3+1

division

3 and 1/3 becomes 1

we have 9-1+1

which simplifies to 9

The value of x is 5. The value of y is 8.66.

The image attached is that of a right triangle. In order to determine the value of x and y, SOHCAHTOA would be used.  x is he opposite side and y in the adjacent side to the angle 30 degrees.

Sin 30 = opposite / hypotenuse

0.5 = x / 10

x = 5

Cos 30  = adjacent / hypotenuse

0.8660 = y / 10

y = 8.66

A similar question was answered here: https://brainly.com/question/18055768

The answer is A since the tip of the triangle points to the smallest number

Answer:

a

Step-by-step explanation:

it says 46 is more than that cetain number

Answer:

none. they have already sold exactly $400,000 worth of computers and accessories

Answer:

24 units

Step-by-step explanation:

I dont know if im right but hope this helps!

Answer: Choice A.   sqrt(116)

==========================================================

Explanation:

If we were to view a vertical cross section of the cone, then we get a triangle. This triangle splits along the vertical height line to form two congruent right triangles.

The horizontal piece of each triangle is the radius r = 4.

The vertical piece is the height h = 10.

Apply the pythagorean theorem to find the slant height, which is the hypotenuse of the right triangle.

a^2 + b^2 = c^2

r^2 + h^2 = x^2

4^2 + 10^2 = x^2

16 + 100 = x^2

116 = x^2

x^2 = 116

x = sqrt(116)

P(A and B) = P(A) + P(B) - P(A or B)

P(A and B) = 0.3 + 0.6 - 0.8

P(A and B) = 0.1

Because this result is nonzero, the two events A and B are not mutually exclusive. It is possible for the two events to happen at the same time.

Mutually exclusive events always have P(A and B) = 0, which means A and B cannot happen simultaneously.

The probability of A or B equals the probability of A plus the probability of B. so, the event is not mutually exclusive because of the P(A and B) = 0.1, not 0.

The probability for event A is 0.3, the probability for event B is 0.6,

and the probability of events A or B is 0.8.

Why are the events not mutually exclusive?

The probability for event A is 0.3, the probability for event B is 0.6,

and the probability of events A or B is 0.8.

P(A) = 0.3

P(B) = 0.8

and P(A∪B) = 0.8

When two events are said to be mutually exclusive when both the events cannot take place simultaneously.

Mutually exclusive events always undergo different outcomes.

These events are also known as disjoint events.

Mutually exclusive events prevent the second event to take place when the first event appears.

The probability of A and B together equals 0,

P(A and B) = 0

The probability of A or B equals the probability of A plus the probability of B,

P(A or B) = P(A) + P(B)

Therefore,

P(A or B) = P(A) + P(B) = 0.3 + 0.6 = 0.9

Here, 0.9 ≠ 0.8

Thus, the events are not mutually exclusive.

Hence, The event is not mutually exclusive because the P(A and B) = 0.1, not 0.

For more details about Probability refer to the link given below.

https://brainly.com/question/14071639

[tex]\dfrac{ 2+ 2i}{5+4i}\\\\\\=\dfrac{(2+2i)(5-4i)}{(5+4i)(5-4i)}\\\\\\=\dfrac{10-8i + 10i -8i^2}{5^2 -(4i)^2}\\\\\\=\dfrac{10+2i +8}{25+16}~~~~;[i^2 =-1]\\\\\\=\dfrac{18+2i}{41}\\\\\\=\dfrac{18}{41} + \dfrac{2}{41}i[/tex]

Answer:

If you mean multiply I think

5y

Step-by-step explanation:

Answer:

LR = 17

Step-by-step explanation:

RP is one section of LP (the whole section). Since R is the midpoint of the segment, RP = LR. Hope this helps!

Answer:

Starting with ΔABC, draw the dilation image of the triangle with a center at the origin and a scale factor of two. Notice that every coordinate of the original triangle has been multiplied by the scale factor (x2). Dilations involve multiplication! Dilation with scale factor 2, multiply by 2.

Step-by-step explanation:

Make me brainlest.

Answer:

9

Step-by-step explanation:

9 pillows per hour i believe

Answer: 40BC and 766AD

Step-by-step explanation:

Answer:

b

Step-by-step explanation:

[tex]y=-x+3~~.....(i)\\\\y = 4x-2~~....(ii)\\\\\text{Substitute}~ y = -x+3~ \text{in equation (ii):}\\\\\\-x+3 = 4x-2\\\\\implies 4x +x = 3+2\\\\\implies 5x = 5\\\\\implies x = \dfrac 55 =1\\\\\\\text{Substitute x= 1 in equation (i):}\\\\y= -1 +3 = 2\\\\\text{Hence}~ (x,y)=(1,2)[/tex]

Answer an essay on nothing

Step-by-step explanation:

In philosophy there is a lot of emphasis on what exists. We call this ontology, which means, the study of being. What is less often examined is what does not exist.

It is understandable that we focus on what exists, as its effects are perhaps more visible. However, gaps or non-existence can also quite clearly have an impact on us in a number of ways. After all, death, often dreaded and feared, is merely the lack of existence in this world (unless you believe in ghosts). We are affected also by living people who are not there, objects that are not in our lives, and knowledge we never grasp.

Upon further contemplation, this seems quite odd and raises many questions. How can things that do not exist have such bearing upon our lives? Does nothing have a type of existence all of its own? And how do we start our inquiry into things we can’t interact with directly because they’re not there? When one opens a box, and exclaims “There is nothing inside it!”, is that different from a real emptiness or nothingness? Why is nothingness such a hard concept for philosophy to conceptualize?

Let us delve into our proposed box, and think inside it a little. When someone opens an empty box, they do not literally find it devoid of any sort of being at all, since there is still air, light, and possibly dust present. So the box is not truly empty. Rather, the word ‘empty’ here is used in conjunction with a prior assumption. Boxes were meant to hold things, not to just exist on their own. Inside they might have a present; an old family relic; a pizza; or maybe even another box. Since boxes have this purpose of containing things ascribed to them, there is always an expectation there will be something in a box. Therefore, this situation of nothingness arises from our expectations, or from our being accustomed. The same is true of statements such as “There is no one on this chair.” But if someone said, “There is no one on this blender”, they might get some odd looks. This is because a chair is understood as something that holds people, whereas a blender most likely not.

The same effect of expectation and corresponding absence arises with death. We do not often mourn people we only might have met; but we do mourn those we have known. This pain stems from expecting a presence and having none. Even people who have not experienced the presence of someone themselves can still feel their absence due to an expectation being confounded. Children who lose one or both of their parents early in life often feel that lack of being through the influence of the culturally usual idea of a family. Just as we have cultural notions about the box or chair, there is a standard idea of a nuclear family, containing two parents, and an absence can be noted even by those who have never known their parents.

This first type of nothingness I call ‘perceptive nothingness’. This nothingness is a negation of expectation: expecting something and being denied that expectation by reality. It is constructed by the individual human mind, frequently through comparison with a socially constructed concept.

Pure nothingness, on the other hand, does not contain anything at all: no air, no light, no dust. We cannot experience it with our senses, but we can conceive it with the mind. Possibly, this sort of absolute nothing might have existed before our universe sprang into being. Or can something not arise from nothing? In which case, pure nothing can never have existed.

If we can for a moment talk in terms of a place devoid of all being, this would contain nothing in its pure form. But that raises the question, Can a space contain nothing; or, if there is space, is that not a form of existence in itself?

This question brings to mind what’s so baffling about nothing: it cannot exist. If nothing existed, it would be something. So nothing, by definition, is not able to ‘be’.

Is absolute nothing possible, then? Perhaps not. Perhaps for example we need something to define nothing; and if there is something, then there is not absolutely nothing. What’s more, if there were truly nothing, it would be impossible to define it. The world would not be conscious of this nothingness. Only because there is a world filled with Being can we imagine a dull and empty one. Nothingness arises from Somethingness, then: without being to compare it to, nothingness has no existence. Once again, pure nothingness has shown itself to be negation.