NinjaDevo

Yup, I agree wih CPhill.

The noticable pattern is multiplying by one more than what you multiplied the last number by.

107*2 = 214

214*3 = 642

642*4 = 2,568

2,568*5 = 12,840

12,840*6 = 77,040

I suppose your right rosala, "mrs." would inply that they are married.

But, "Miss" would imply that they are not married.

I believe the correct thing to say would have been mr./ms. anonymous, because ms. means that they could be married or not married. :)

Sure thing mr./mrs. anonymous!

We have -2(4+3x2)+9 ÷ 3-2

I'm assuming that by the 2 after the 3x in the parantheses you means 3x², this is how I'll solve the question.

-2(4+3x²)+9 ÷ 3-2            ---Use the distributive property to distribute the -2 into 4+3x²

-8-6x²+9÷3-2          ---Divide 9 by 3, this is the next thing to do in our order of operations

-8-6x²+3-2           ---Add/subtract the numbers not containing x  

-6x² - 7

And there you go!

5.) Is x > 4 a solution for the inequality?

No.

x*26 > 7²⁶

x*26 > 9,387,480,337,647,754,305,649

x > 361,056,936,063,375,165,601.9

3.) What is 374*246/2-146+25?

374*246/2-146+25

92004/2-146+25

46002-146+25

45856+25

45,881

2.) A possible algebraic equation expression for these phone plans would be c = mr + a. 

c = total cost after m months

m = number of months

r = monthly rate

a = activation fee

This would be an algebraic equation for the cell phone plans because they would tell you the total cost for both of the plans after a given amount of years and with differing activation fees and monthly charges.

If you think about it, this is the same equation as y=mx + b, but with different letters for unknowns! Thus, you could graph the two cell phone plans if you knew their montly rates and activation fees, and it would show you which plan would be better depending on how many years you are planning to have that plan, aswell as the point that it wouldn't matter what plan you bought, because it would cost you the same. (where the lines intercect)

Nice answer aynonymous.

I was personally stumped on that one myself. :)

Ok, so we have

$${\left({\frac{{\mathtt{3}}}{{\mathtt{4}}}}\right)}^{{\mathtt{2}}}$$

Something raised to the second power really just means times itself two times, right?

Here's an example:

5² = 5*5 = 25

So, back to our question. We really just have to multiply 3/4 times 3/4!

$$\left({\frac{{\mathtt{3}}}{{\mathtt{4}}}}\right){\mathtt{\,\times\,}}\left({\frac{{\mathtt{3}}}{{\mathtt{4}}}}\right)$$

Multiply the top and bottoms

$${\frac{{\mathtt{9}}}{{\mathtt{16}}}}$$

or

$${\mathtt{0.562\: \!5}}$$

And there we go! 3/4 to the second power is 9/16 or 0.5625.

A prime number is a number greater than one that has no positive divisors other than 1 and itself.

Although you can't divide 1 by anthing but 1, the number 1 doesn't meet the second qualifiation "a number that is greater than 1"

That's why 1 isn't a prime number.

A little off topic of the actual question, here's a chart of all the prime numbers 1-100. Highlighted means it's a prime number. :)

1.) Matt's answer is incorrect. This question is dealing with the order of operations, and from −10 + 30 ÷ 5 
to 20 ÷ 5 he went out of the order of operations, doing addition before division.

Karen's answer is also incorrect. In step 6 – 4( –2)² + 30 ÷ 5 to 6 – 4( −4) + 30 ÷ 5, her exponets are wrong. When she did (-2)² she got -4 instead of +4.