Hmmm, I will teach you how to do ratios.
If you see there are a specific ratio, and there is a certain quantity, divide the original ratio by the quantity.
The ratio of daisies to roses is 8:18. 4 daises would be half the ratio quantity, so the #of roses is half the ratio quantity of roses. 18/2 = 9.
Thus there are 9 roses.
f(f(x)) = 5 = f(x')
If x' >= -4, then 5 = x'^2 - 4; x' = 3.
If x' < -4, then 5 = 3x' + 1; x' = 4/3.
Case 1: f(x) = 3
If x >= -4, then 3 = x^2 - 4; x = sqrt(7).
If x < -4, then 3 = 3x + 1; x = 2/3.
Case 2: f(x) = 4/3
If x >= -4, then 4/3 = x^2 - 4; x = 4sqrt(3)/3.
If x < -4, then 4/3 = 3x + 1; x = 1/9.
Thus there are 4 values of x that work, and the values are above.
There is a much quicker way to do it than calculating it; try looking at how many options there are for the range of x (in this case there are 2: x >= -4, x < -4) then multiply by the #of 'f's (in this case 2: f(f(x))). 2 x 2 = 4. :)
Since there is no statement on who normally lies or not --- I will treat this as an IRL situation.
So E and B are saying it was the other person because E is defending himself, and B is the accusor because he said it BEFORE E. A first said that D broke it, and D was also defending himself. C didn't break it because noone accused him, and he said so himself so the probability of him breaking it was the least.
If D was telling the truth, then he would've not only defended himself, but also put the blame on someone else. I think B is less suspicious than D, and is just blind or saw it wrong.
Child D broke it (i think)