I'm quite terrible at this aspect, so I'm merely making a guess.
X serves as the variable while x denotes the multiplication symbol.
X + (X x 3 - 1) + (X x 3 - 1) - 4) <span>≥ 45 is the outcome I arrived at.
The solution to that inequality is
X </span><span>≥ 7, I suppose.</span>
Answer:
Robyn's model is logical, while Mark's is illogical.
Step-by-step explanation:
This question doesn't require calculations. What we need to do is analyze each model logically.
Mark's
Mark's representation indicates 20 instead of 2, which signifies that 200 is ten times greater than 20, making it nonsensical.
Robyn's
Robyn's representation displays 2, suggesting that 200 is 100 times greater than 2, which is not only accurate but also reasonable since 100 * 2 equals 200.
Response:
The fence's width is 6 feet.
Detailed explanation:
To start, let’s define some variables.
Let the width of the fence be denoted as w, and the length as l.
Next, determine the length: the width is 2 feet less than half of the length.
w = l/2 - 2
Alternatively, l/2 can be expressed as w + 2, leading to l = 2(w + 2).
The total perimeter of the fence is 44 feet. The perimeter for a rectangle can be calculated using the formula:
P = 2(l + w)
Inserting what we know:
P = 44 and l = 2(w + 2)
44 = 2(2(w+2) + w)
44 = 2(2w + 4 + w)
44 = 2(3w + 4)
44 = 6w + 8
6w = 36
w = 36/6
w = 6 feet
Answer:
91
Step-by-step explanation:
40/.44
1) For the expected number in 200 restaurants where exactly 8 customers use the drive-through, it is 20.66. Similarly, for exactly 9 customers, the expected count is 13.76. To compute these expectations, we utilize the Poisson distribution which defines the success probability X, considering a certain operational rate for the drive-through services during specified times.
