You move left 2 units and down 1 unit. You end at (-5, -5.) Where did yo start

Answer:

Record yourself explaining your thoughts and listen to the recording. Continue re-recording what you say and listening to your recording until it sounds they way you want it to.

Answer:

+29 C

Step-by-step explanation:

If we find the distance between both numbers on  number line and we put -2 on the negative side and +27 on the positive side we can find the distance which is 29 and this means In Milan it was warmer by: +29C

Step-by-step explanation:

m(t) = 11t + 55

the slope is always the factor of the variable, so here the slope is 11.

since t is the number of hours riding (after the noon rest stop), the slope (11) is actually the mean speed the rider is going (after the noon rest stop) : with every hour riding the cyclist goes another 11 miles, so this speed is 11 mph.

the y-intercept is the m value when t = 0, because here in our example y (the result variable) is renamed m.

it is here 55.

t = 0 means no time riding yet, so 55 is the "starting value" of the function. that means that the cyclist traveled already 55 miles earlier that day before the noon rest stop.

the cyclist can only ride until 6pm. but we don't know how long the noon rest stop is (i.e. when he continues riding after the rest stop).

so I need to make some assumptions :

the mean speed (11 mph) after lunch break, and the y-intercept (55) suggest to me that the cyclist was riding 5 hours before the stop (5×11 = 55), and will also ride 5 hours after the stop (= from 1pm to 6pm).

if this is wrong, and the cyclist starts at e.g. 12pm, then please just adjust the following numbers accordingly.

but here again, I am assuming the cyclist will go from 1pm to 6pm (for 5 hours).

the domain is the interval or set of all valid values of the input variable (here t) : all real numbers in [0 .. 5].

the "timer" starts at 0 right at the end of the noon test stop. and then the cyclist can go max. 5 hours. and I assume any part of an hour is valid, so we use real numbers instead of e.g. whole numbers.

the range is the interval or set of all valid values of the result variable (here m) : all real numbers in [55 .. 110].

for t = 0 we have m = 55. and this goes continuously up with t until t = 5, leading to 11×5 + 55 = 55+55 = 110.

Answer:

No, a Celsius temperature is not proportional to its equivalent Fahrenheit temperature.

Step-by-step explanation:

The formula is

F=(9/5) C+ 32

F increases as C increases and F decreases as C decreases, but the relation is not a direct proportionality.

In mathematics, a direct proportion has the form

y=mx

where m is a constant.

If the formula had been F=(9/5) C, it would have been a direct proportion.

However, the addition of the + 32 term makes the formula no longer a direct proportion

Answer:

36°

Step-by-step explanation:

I used an online protractor to solve it

Answer:

40 i think

Step-by-step explanation:

Answer:

5/4

Step-by-step explanation:

Answer:

Quadrant 4

Step-by-step explanation:

Answer:

3rd quadrant

Step-by-step explanation:

it has the pentagon

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.

The residual of a regression is the difference between the actual value and the predicted value

The values of (a) and (b) are -0.4 and 0, respectively.

The entries are given as:

x  Given  Predicted    Residual

1    -0.7         -0.6             -1

2   2.3         1.95            0.35

3   4.1           4.5              a

4   7.2          7.2              b

The residual of a line of best fit is calculated using:

[tex]Residual = Actual - Predicted[/tex]

Using the entry headings, the formula would be:

[tex]Residual = Given - Predicted[/tex]

To calculate the value of (a), we make use of entry (3).

So, we have:

[tex]a = 4.1- 4.5[/tex]

[tex]a = -0.4[/tex]

To calculate the value of (b), we make use of entry (4).

So, we have:

[tex]b = 7.2- 7.2[/tex]

[tex]b = 0[/tex]

Hence, the values of (a) and (b) are -0.4 and 0, respectively.

Read more about residuals at:

https://brainly.com/question/4333650

Answer: m = 2

Step-by-step explanation:

What we know:

How to solve:

By using the slope equation and the two points given to us, we can calculate the slope.

Process:

Slope =                                                                          2

Solution: m = 2

The given ratios expresses the number of time a value is larger or smaller

than another value.

The correct responses are;

Reasons:

3. Given that the perimeter of the rectangle = 72

The ratio of the lengths of the sides = 1:2

Let a and b represent the sides, we have;

2·a + 2·b = 72

[tex]\displaystyle \frac{a}{b} = \mathbf{\frac{1}{2}}[/tex]

Which gives;

2·a = b

2·a + 2·(2·a) = 72

6·a = 72

a = 72 ÷ 6 = 12

b = 2·a = 2 × 12 = 24

The lengths of the sides are; (B) 12 and 24

4. Extended ratio = 2:3:7

The perimeter = 36

The lengths of the sides are;

[tex]\displaystyle \frac{2}{2 + 3 + 7} \times 36 = \mathbf{6}[/tex]

[tex]\displaystyle \frac{3}{2 + 3 + 7} \times 36 = \mathbf{9}[/tex]

[tex]\displaystyle \frac{7}{2 + 3 + 7} \times 36 = \mathbf{21}[/tex]

The lengths are; (D) 6, 9, 21

5. The given equation is presented as follows;

[tex]\displaystyle \frac{5}{x + 7} = \mathbf{\frac{3}{x + 2}}[/tex]

5 × (x + 2) = 3 × (x + 7)

5·x + 10 = 3·x + 21

5·x - 3·x  = 21 - 10

2·x = 11

[tex]\displaystyle x = \mathbf{ \frac{11}{2}}[/tex]

The correct option is; [tex]\displaystyle \underline{(E) \ \frac{11}{2}}[/tex]

6. The width to length ratio is [tex]\displaystyle \mathbf{\frac{2.5}{7.0}}[/tex]

The simplified ratio is therefore;

[tex]\displaystyle \frac{2.5}{7.0} = \frac{2 \times 2.5}{2 \times 7.0} = \mathbf{\frac{5}{14}}[/tex]

The correct option is (E) [tex]\displaystyle \underline{(E) \ \frac{5}{14}}[/tex]

7. The given ratio of the lengths is 3:1

Therefore;

[tex]\overline{BC}[/tex]:[tex]\overline{EF}[/tex] = 3:1

Which gives;

[tex]\displaystyle \mathbf{\frac{\overline{BC}}{\overline{EF}}} = \frac{3}{1}[/tex]

[tex]\overline{BC}[/tex] = 18

Therefore;

[tex]\displaystyle \frac{18}{\overline{EF}} = \frac{3}{1}[/tex]

18 × 1 = 3 × [tex]\overline{EF}[/tex]

[tex]\displaystyle \overline{EF} = \frac{18 \times 1}{3} = 6[/tex]

[tex]\overline{EF}[/tex] = 6

By Pythagorean theorem, we have;

[tex]\overline{DF}[/tex]² = [tex]\mathbf{\overline{DE}}[/tex]² + [tex]\mathbf{\overline{EF}}[/tex]²

Which gives;

[tex]\overline{DF}[/tex]² = 3² + 6² = 45

[tex]\overline{DF}[/tex] = √(45) = 3·√5

Using the given ratio, we have;

[tex]\overline{AC}[/tex] = 3 × [tex]\mathbf{\overline{DF}}[/tex]

Which gives;

[tex]\overline{AC}[/tex] = 3 × 3·√5 = 9·√5

[tex]\overline{AC}[/tex] = 9·√5

The correct option is; (B) [tex]\overline{EF}[/tex] = 6, [tex]\overline{AC}[/tex] = 9·√5

8. EF = 1, AB = 2

CD = 2, CE = 4

Therefore;

[tex]\displaystyle \mathbf{\frac{EF}{AB}} =\frac{1}{2}[/tex]

[tex]\displaystyle \mathbf{\frac{CD}{CE}} =\frac{2}{4} = \frac{1}{2}[/tex]

Which gives;

[tex]\displaystyle \frac{EF}{AB} =\displaystyle \mathbf{\frac{CD}{CE}}[/tex]

(C) The values are equal

9. AC = 6, BE = 8

DF = 3, BD = 6

Column A

[tex]\displaystyle \frac{AC}{BE} =\displaystyle \mathbf{\frac{6}{8}} = \frac{3}{4}[/tex]

Column B

[tex]\displaystyle \frac{DF}{BD} =\displaystyle \mathbf{\frac{3}{6}} = \frac{1}{2}[/tex]

[tex]\displaystyle \frac{3}{4} > \mathbf{\frac{1}{2}}[/tex]

Therefore;

Column A is greater than column B

(A) The value in column A is greater

Learn more about ratios here:

https://brainly.com/question/2774839

Answer:

sine

Step-by-step explanation:

Answer:

$6400

Step-by-step explanation:

If Mrs. Hill takes out a mortgage for $80,000 with a 4% interest rate, what will her interest be after 20 years?

First you want to find how much she will get each year.

Turn 4% into a decimal.

Which you have to move the decimal point over to spaces to the left.

4. ----- .4 ----- .04

Now that you have done that you need to multiply,

$80000 × .04

which is $3200.

Now you know she gets $3200 a year.

Now multiply $3200 by 20.

$3200 × 20

which is $6400.

She will get $6400 interest.

Answer:

All real numbers

Step-by-step explanation:

It can go on to infinity.

Hope that helps

The required angles from smallest to largest are m<M < m<L < m<K

Given the coordinate of the triangle KLM given as K(-2,-2), L(2, 6), M(7, -2)

Get the measure of KL, KM and LM using the distance formula as shown:

[tex]D=\sqrt{(x_2-x_1)^2+(y_2-y)_1)^2}[/tex]

For the length KL with coordinate points K(-2,-2), L(2, 6)

[tex]KL=\sqrt{(2-(-2))^2+(6-(-2))^2}\\KL=\sqrt{4^2+8^2}\\KL=\sqrt{16+64}\\KL=\sqrt{80}\\KL =4\sqrt{5}[/tex]

For the length KM with coordinate points K(-2,-2), M(7, -2)

[tex]KM=\sqrt{(7-(-2))^2+(-2-(-2))^2}\\KM=\sqrt{9^2+0^2}\\KM=\sqrt{81}\\KM=9[/tex]

The length LM with coordinate points L(2,6), M(7, -2)

[tex]LM=\sqrt{(7--2)^2+(-2-6)^2}\\LM=\sqrt{5^2+(-8)^2}\\LM=\sqrt{25+64}\\LM=\sqrt{89}[/tex]

From the distances, we can see that side LM > KM > KL. Hence the required angles from smallest to largest are m<M < m<L < m<K

Learn more on distances between two points here: https://brainly.com/question/23848540

Answer:

84√3

Step-by-step explanation:

6√21√28

6√7√3√7√4

(6√7√3√7)(2)

(6*7)(√3)(2)

(42)(√3)(2)

84√3

[tex]6\sqrt{21} \cdot \sqrt{28}\\\\=6 \left(\sqrt{21 \times 28 \right)\\\\=6\left(\sqrt{588}\right)\\\\=6\left(\sqrt{196 \times 3}\right)\\\\=6\left(14\sqrt 3\right)\\\\=84\sqrt{3}[/tex]

Answer:

114 each month

Step-by-step explanation:

Answer:

114

Step-by-step explanation:

228 divided by 2 = 114

Answer:

There are many:

10*54

5*108

2*270

4*135

And more

Step-by-step explanation:

2, 5, 2, 3, 3, 3

These are the multiplies of 540 you can just multiply and they always get you the same solution: 540

Hope this helps!

Answer:

what the answer

Step-by-step explanation:

Answer:

a^-7

Step-by-step explanation:

so when dividing exponents you subtract them so the exponents are -13 and -6  you would just subtract them

-13 - (-6) = -13 + 6 = -7

and so a^-7 is ur answer

Multiply each X by its corresponding probability P, then add up them up.

E[X] = 3•0.2 + 4•0.1 + 5•0.25 + 7•0.05 + 9•0.4

⇒   E[X] = 6.2

Answer:

Reflected along x axis

Translated 7 units to the right

Step-by-step explanation:

If a point (x, y) is reflected along the x axis, its x coordinate remains the same and the y coordinate is opposite (negated). The new point is at (x, -y)

If a point (x, y) is translated h units to the right, the new coordinate is (x+h, y).The transformation are as follows:

It is reflected along the x axis so that the new coordinates would be at A1 at (- 4, -4), B1 at (- 2, -2), C1 at (- 2, 1), D1 at (- 4, -1)

It is translated 7 units to the right, The new coordinates are A' at (3, -4), B' at (5, -2), C' at (5, 1), D' at (3, -1)

Hope that's better

Answer:

1. B

2. Seven Hundred thousand nine hundred and four

Step-by-step explanation:

[tex]\huge \bf༆ Answer ༄[/tex]

Let's calculate the volume of sphere with :

[tex] \sf \: vol = \dfrac{4}{3} \pi {r}^{3} [/tex]

Now, plug the value of radius (r) and find volume ~

The value closest to it is 65.45

Therefore, that's the most appropriate choice ~

[tex] ꧁  \large \rm{kaul} \: ꧂[/tex]

Answer:

The domain of a function f(x) is the set of all values for which the function is defined, and the range of the function is the set of all values that f takes.

Step-by-step explanation:

Answer:

966

Step-by-step explanation:

180% is written as 1.80 as a decimal. You can multiply this by 345 to get the profit he made, and to find the total selling price, add the profit (1.80x345) to the original price (345)