So the price of the bike is increased by 30%. If we assume the original price of the bike is b, 125= b+0.3*b = 1.3(b). We rearrange this, dividing 1.3 on both sides of the equation, and we get 125/1.3 = (roughly) 96.15$. Checking, we add (0.3)(96.15) = 28.85, 96.15+28.85 = 125$.
Reach out if you need any help.
Never mind, I found out how to do it, but it appears that your answer is wrong?
So I think we might use the hockey stick thereom thing...
it's C(n+k-1, k-1).
So if the twins each get 0, we have 6 candy, 6+(5-2)-1 = 8. 5-2-1=2. C(8,2).
We also get C(6,2), C(4,2), C(2,2), and c(0,2) with increasing values
Adding these together we get 50.
Based on my knowledge on bacteria, the growth isn't uniform, but it doesn't make sense unless if a LOT die every hour... I'll do two cases for each scenario.
If the growth is uniform, 7200-6000 = 1200. Since it's 3 hours, 1200/3 = 400/hour. I'm not sure if it's 19 hours AFTER the original 3 hours or after the starting time. Either multiply 400 by 19 or 16.
If the growth isn't uniform: I'm pretty sure bacteria doubles... but there are a bunch of cases so I'm afraid I can't help you... sorry... if you have anyquestions please ask...
Since there are 2*3*5 = 30 possible combinations of the above properties, each possible type of car is represented exactly once. Once we choose the first car, the second car has 2-1=1 possibility for the transmission to be different, 3-1 = 2 possibilities for the color to be different, and possibilities for the brand to be different. Thus there are 1*2*4 cars that have no properties in common with the first car. We could have chosen this second car in 29 equally-likely ways, and hence our answer is 8/29.
However, thank you for the effort... I really appreciate it... thanks!!
Please don't take any offense from this, but you may want to check your grammar. Let me edit a bit of it.
It was noon when my dad and I went to get our hunting licenses. It was time for us to head home to prepare for the next day for our hunting trip. I have eagerly waited a long time to spend some time with my dad away from his busy schedule. And since I was a young lady I got to learn from him, and for me to have this for this opportunity I was able to learn nesessary survival skills. If something happened in the future I would be ready for anything, especially hunting for my food to survive. It was finally time for use to hunt. My father and I packed up our stuff and left the warmth of the house to go out into the woods. We were leaving to head to Bastrop, Lousiana, the location of our hunting spot. After waiting for a few hours we finally saw a deer.
The last time I got to hunt was long ago and I wrote this to talk about how hunting had affected me. It shows how I love spending time with my family and how it impacted me personally. My goal for these great life lessons my father taught me is that we must learn from our loved ones because they also make mistakes in their life and they don’t want us to make the same mistakes as they did when they were younger. Sharing my experience also means the world to me. It has helped shape the person I am today and with this, it will give people a better understanding of the way we must learn from the wise and learn from there aspects on hunting trips and safer ways to be responsible and by this most people would start having a understanding about how a gun can be used for inserting violence. Plus, having a better perspective on their life and lastly this is me signing off.
***Try to use show not tell, I'll not edit that, because it's not my work it's yours, I won't decide the meaning.
***update 2/ 21... "lastly this is me signing off" is not really formal, and doesn't make sense in the context... I suggest you take it out. Try to have a more reflective ending. If you think guns are bad and should not be allowed(con Article 2, liberal) write what you may have learned about guns from this experience... if you think guns are good(pro Article 2, conservative) maybe show how guns are not bad in the hands of innocent hunters and not serial killers? Follow your logic, I'm clueless...
Perhaps we can introduce a variable, d, for the distance(over 1 hour). Assume d/1 hour is the speed of the faster train, which means that (s-19)/ 1 hour is the speed of the second(in miles/hour, of course). The total distance covered in 1 hour is d+d-19 = 2d-19. 5 hours becomes 5(2d-19) , which equals 845 since they meet. 845/5 = 169. 2d -19 = 169 =>> 2d = 188 ==> d = 188/2 = 94.
The speed of the faster train is 94 miles/hour and the slower one is 94-19 = 75 miles/hour. I hope this is the answer. Look over it, and if you need help understanding, ask!