B c 4. You have two brothers and two sisters. Your mother plans to divide a sum of money between her children in one of the ratios below. The ratios are written in descending order of the children's ages, A 5:4:3:2:1 12:9:8:4:3 C 9:8:6:3:1 D 6:5:4:3:2 a) If you are the eldest child, say which ratio you would choose. Give a reason for your answer. b) If you are the middle child, say which ratio you would choose. Give a reason for your answer. c) If you are the youngest child, say which ratio you would choose. Give a reason for your answer. d) If each child receives a whole number of rands and no cents in each case, calculate the minimum sum of money that your mother is dividing. Show all your calculations. ( Callic thinking of ti TL​

location: point 0

step-by-step explanation:

well, -8 to 10 on a number line is 18 spaces.

1/9 of 18 is 2.

so, 4/9 of 18 must be 8.

8 spaces from -8 (a) is 0.

so, 4/9 of the way from -8 to 10 is 0!

hello from mrbilldoesmath!

answer:

25x^2 + 90x + 84

discussion:

mn(x) = m(n(x)) = m( 5x + 9) =

(5x + 9)^2 + 3 =>

25x^2 + 90x + 9^2 + 3 =

25x^2 + 90x + 84                 (as 9^2 = 9*9 = 81)

which is the second choice

regards,  

mrb

p.s.   i'll be on vacation from friday, dec 22 to jan 2, 2019. have a great new year!

answer:   35 % is the probability of a late departure or an early arrival.

step-by-step explanation:

let l represents the late departure and e represents the early departure.

then, according to the question,

p(l) = 12 %,   p(e) = 27 % and = 4 %

and, we have to find out,

but, we know that,

which is the required equation that will use to find the probability of a late departure or an early departure.

therefore,   the probability of a late departure or an early arrival =   35 %

< xcy ≅ < xby

step-by-step explanation:

in δcax and δbax,

so, δcax ≅ δbax (side-angle-side or sas)

since δcax ≅ δbax, we can conclude < acx ≅ < abx

in δacy and δaby,

so, δacy ≅ δaby (side-angle-side or sas)

since δacy ≅ δaby, we can conclude < acy ≅ < aby

now,

< acy ≅ < aby

=> < acx + < xcy ≅ < abx + < xby

=> < acx + < xcy ≅ < acx + < xby   (since < acx ≅ < abx already proved above)

subtracting < acx from both sides, we get

< acx + < xcy -< acx ≅ < acx + < xby -< acx

cancelling out < acx and -< acx from both sides, we get

< xcy ≅ < xby (proved)