plz plz plz plz help plz no LINKS

Answer:

89 I think

Step-by-step explanation:

my bad if I'm wrong I bearly woke up

Answer:

60 degrees

Step-by-step explanation:

Triangles always equal to = 180 degrees

with that being said 70 + 50 = 120

You can subtract 120 from 180

120 - 180 = 60 degrees

Your answer is A. 60 degrees

Answer:

Question (A) firgue b is pallorgram

Question ( B) Only A is a rentengle

Question (C) is already right

Step-by-step explanation:

Answer:

(5,-1) Hope It Help

Step-by-step explanation:

Brainliest please

Answer:

We have sin² x + cos² x =1 for all real x.

Therefore, sin² x = 1 – cos² x = 1 – (8/17)² = 1 – 64/289 = 225/289 = (15/17)².

However, remember that if x² = a², then x can be +a or –a.

Therefore, sin x can be either –15/17 or +15/17.

Everyone but Anirban so far has forgotten the negative solution.

Step-by-step explanation:

Given that sinθ=817 and cosθ<0 , we have: cosθ=−√1−sin2θ. cosθ=−√1−(817)2. cosθ=−√1−64289.

Answer:

7. If m∠AEB = 75°, then m∠AED = 105.

8. If m∠1 = 35°, then m∠4 = 35.

Answer:

tan P=8/15

tan Q=15/8

Step-by-step explanation:

tan P=opposite/adjacent, where 8 is the opposite, while 15 is the adjacent.

tanQ=opposite/adjacent, where 15 is the opposite, while 8 is the adjacent.

Answer:

This is your answer

Answer:  39.09 km per hour average

Step-by-step explanation:

add total distance and divide by total time

(30+400)/(5.5+5.5)

430/11=39.0909

Answer:

5,904 scraps

Step-by-step explanation:

36 by 164 blocks

Answer:

Age of Peter = 3 year

Step-by-step explanation:

Given:

Peter is 8 years younger than Jonne

Assume;

Age of Jonne = a

So,

Age of Peter = a - 8

After 5 years,

2[a - 8 + 5] = a + 5

2a - 6 = a + 5

a = 11

Age of Jonne = 11

Age of Peter = 11 - 8

Age of Peter = 3 year

Answer:

A. (1, 4)

Step-by-step explanation:

Sana makatulong

Answer: x is 8/5

Step-by-step explanation:

Answer:

x = [tex]\frac{8}{5}[/tex]

Step-by-step explanation:

Given

[tex]\frac{13x+12x}{4}[/tex] = 10 ( multiply both sides by 4 to clear the fraction )

25x = 40 ( divide both sides by 25 )

x = [tex]\frac{40}{25}[/tex] = [tex]\frac{8}{5}[/tex]

Answer:

Answer is D hope this helps :)

Step-by-step explanation:

Answer:

A. left parenthesis 3 comma 2 right parenthesis

Step-by-step explanation:

It's correct 100%

Answer:

[tex]Amount = Rs4420[/tex]

Step-by-step explanation:

Given

[tex]Principal = Rs4000[/tex]

[tex]Interest = Rs420[/tex]

Required

Determine the amount paid

This is calculated as:

[tex]Amount = Principal + Interest[/tex]

[tex]Amount = Rs4000 + Rs420[/tex]

[tex]Amount = Rs4420[/tex]

Using an exponential function, it is found that $11,747 will be in the account after 4 years.

An increasing exponential function is modeled by:

[tex]A(t) = A(0)(1 + r)^t[/tex]

In which:

In this problem, considering the initial investment of $7,400, and the fact that it doubles every 6 years, the equation is given by:

[tex]A(t) = 7400(2)^{\frac{t}{6}}[/tex]

Hence the amount in 4 years is given by:

[tex]A(4) = 7400(2)^{\frac{4}{6}} = 11747[/tex]

More can be learned about exponential functions at https://brainly.com/question/25537936

#SPJ1

Answer:

Step-by-step explanation:

11747

Answer:

slope(m) =3

given point (X1,y1 ) )=(2,5)

equation of line=y-y1= m(x-x1)

y-5=3(x+2)

3x-y+11=0

Answer:

y=3x-1

Step-by-step explanation:

y-y1=m(x-x1)

y-5=3(x-2)

y=3x-6+5

y=3x-1

Answer:

$39.04

Step-by-step explanation:

1.Approach

To solve this problem, one must first find the amount of tip that was left, then add the value to the cost of the meal. The amount of tip given can be found by dividing the percent value of the tip by (100) and then multiplying the result by the price of the meal.

2.Find the amount of tip

To find the amount of tip that was left, divide the percent value of the tip by (100). This technique converts the percent into a decimal. After doing so,  multiply the result by the cost of the meal.

Tip as a percent: 15%

Tip as a decimal: 0.15

Amount of tip left:

33.95 * 0.15 = 5.0925

Round the result

~5.09

3.Find the total bill

Disincluding the tax, one now has to add the tip to the cost of the meal to find the total amount paid.

(tip) + (price)

= (5.09) + (33.95)

= (39.04)

Answer:

What’s your Question?

Step-by-step explanation:

Answer:

I mean I don't know your options, but the answer is probably something like y=180x

Step-by-step explanation:

Answer:

1440

Step-by-step explanation:

Sum= (180)(8)=1440

Better:

Sum= (x-2)(180)

x represents the number of sides

So it would be

sum=(10-2)(180)

The answer then would be 1440

Answer:

The answer is: Yes

Step-by-step explanation:

1. Substitute the 2's for the x's.

2. Substitute the 3's for the y's

3. You get 4-9= -5

4. Do the same for the second problem.

5. 8-12= -4

6. Both problems are correct once the substitutions are made, therefore the answer is "Yes".

Answer:

REASONS TO KEEP OUR PROMISES

1. Introduction

Promises are valuable because they allow us to receive assurances that others will act in

certain ways and give these assurances ourselves. Assurances are worthwhile because they

can give us peace of mind, we can use them to establish and stabilize private schemes of

cooperation and, anyway, we often have good reason to want people to do (or not do) certain

things. The obligation to keep a promise derives in some way from the value that assurances

provide.1

Accounts of our fiduciary obligations divide over the role they assign to social practices.

David Hume and John Rawls argue that promising creates in others the relevant assurances

only if there exists a social practice of promising in which most everyone knows that people

generally fulfill their promises. These philosophers think that our fiduciary obligations

depend essentially on an institution of promising, but they disagree about why we have an

obligation not to violate its rules. Hume seems to think that promise-breaking is wrong in

virtue of impartial disapproval towards acts that undermine the practice of promising while

Rawls argues that it is wrong to break a promise because doing so exploits a just institution of promising from which we have voluntarily benefited.2

In contrast to these practice views,

Thomas Scanlon maintains that our obligation to keep a promise does not necessarily depend

on any social convention; instead, he argues that we ought to keep our promises because we

have a duty not to frustrate certain expectations that our promising can induce in others.3

These three views are often presented as competing accounts of the most fundamental

reason why we should keep our promises. I believe that none of them, however, can explain

our fiduciary obligations in all (or most) cases that involve binding promises. Scanlon’s

expectation view is subject to a fatal circularity in paradigm cases in which our only reason

to keep a promise is an awareness that, having made a promise, we are obligated to keep it.

Hume’s view cannot explain why we ought to keep a promise the breaking of which is

unlikely to undermine the institution of promising. And Rawls’ view (along with Hume’s)

cannot explain why it is wrong to break promises that are made when no social practice of

promising exists. Moreover, neither practice views nor expectation views alone can fully

explain the wrongs involved in breaking promises that both invoke the rules of a social

practice of promising and lead others to form certain expectations about our actions. This

suggests that there is no single, fundamental reason why we should keep our promises.

After arguing for these claims, I go on to sketch an alternative account according to

which a family of fiduciary principles, including ones similar to those suggested by Hume,

Rawls and Scanlon, explains why we ought to keep our promises. A principle is a fiduciary

principle if it explains why one or more promises are binding. On this view, no single fiduciary principle explains why all binding promises generate obligations and often one or

more fiduciary principle will apply in a given case, possibly over-determining why we should

keep that promise. For example, principles of the sort proposed by Rawls and Scanlon would

each give us sufficient reason to keep a promise that invokes the rules of a just institution of

promising and also arouses certain expectations in others. A pluralist account of this sort, I

argue, provides a better framework for understanding the nature of our fiduciary obligations.

Answer:

e = 16

Step-by-step explanation:

-5e-4e = -144

-9e = -144

e = 16

Answer:

bc  if it has no points  it will go on infinitely

Step-by-step explanation:

Answer:

R=155°

S=25°

T=155°

Step-by-step explanation:

R + 25° =180°

R = 180° - 25°

R = 155°

(2) S + 155° =180°

S = 180° - 155°

S = 25°

T = R because t is opposite of r

I hope this was helpful