Students in a discussion of gun control in a sociology class at Foothill Community College argue that Republicans are more likely to oppose gun control than Independents. They use data from an article titled "Gun Control Splits America," published March 23, 2010 in pewresarch. org by the Pew Research Center for the People and the Press. In this study 62% of Republicans and 57% of Independents say that states should not be able to pass laws banning handguns. For a claim that a larger proportion of Republicans oppose state laws banning handguns when compared to Independents, the null and alternative hypotheses are The p -value is 0.06. If we conduct this test at a 5% level of significance, what would be an appropriate conclusion?

let's solve your equation step-by-step.

24−3x=−27

step 1: simplify both sides of the equation.

24−3x=−27

24+−3x=−27

−3x+24=−27

step 2: subtract 24 from both sides.

−3x+24−24=−27−24

−3x=−51

step 3: divide both sides by -3.

−3x

−3

=

−51

−3

x=17

answer:

x=17

step-by-step explanation:

mark brainliest and have a great day!

- "runner b is moving at a slower rate."

- "the graphs shown are graphs of distance(km) against time(min).

the slopes of this graphs are are given by:

slope = (change in y)/(change in x)

= (change in distance)/(change in time)

this is the formula for finding the speed. so, the slope of these graphs represent the speed of the runner.

taking each division in the graph to represent 1 on both axis:

runner a ⇒ speed = (2-0)/(1-0)

= 2/1

= 2 km/min

runner b ⇒ speed = (3-0)/(3-0)

= 3/3

= 1 km/min

this shows that   runner b is moving at a slower rate."

i think it's eleven too, don't woosh me here, but according to the "experts" it's 2.

the proof starts from the peano postulates, which define the natural

numbers n. n is the smallest set satisfying these postulates:

  p1.   1 is in n.

  p2.   if x is in n, then its "successor" x' is in n.

  p3.   there is no x such that x' = 1.

  p4.   if x isn't 1, then there is a y in n such that y' = x.

  p5.   if s is a subset of n, 1 is in s, and the implication

      (x in s => x' in s) holds, then s = n.

then you have to define addition recursively:

  def: let a and b be in n. if b = 1, then define a + b = a'

      (using p1 and p2). if b isn't 1, then let c' = b, with c in n

      (using p4), and define a + b = (a + c)'.

then you have to define 2:

  def:   2 = 1'

2 is in n by p1, p2, and the definition of 2.

theorem:   1 + 1 = 2

proof: use the first part of the definition of + with a = b = 1.

      then 1 + 1 = 1' = 2   q.e.d.

note: there is an alternate formulation of the peano postulates which

replaces 1 with 0 in p1, p3, p4, and p5. then you have to change the

definition of addition to this:

  def: let a and b be in n. if b = 0, then define a + b = a.

      if b isn't 0, then let c' = b, with c in n, and define

      a + b = (a + c)'.

you also have to define 1 = 0', and 2 = 1'. then the proof of the

theorem above is a little different:

proof: use the second part of the definition of + first:

      1 + 1 = (1 + 0)'

      now use the first part of the definition of + on the sum in

      parentheses:   1 + 1 = (1)' = 1' = 2   q.e.d.

vertical asymptote .

horizontal asymptote .

step-by-step explanation:

given function is .

vertical asymptote is given by setting

denominator =0

when degree of numerator and denominator are same then divide first term of numerator by first term of denominator to get horizontal asymptote.