Convert the following as instructed 1.) Change 3 oz to Tablespoons 2.) Change 12 tsps to Tablespoons 3.) Change 45 ml to tsps. 4.) Change 2 Tablespoons to ml 5.) Change 5 Tablespoons to tsp

babuliaam 2022-09-14 Answered
Convert the following as instructed
1.) Change 3 oz to Tablespoons
2.) Change 12 tsps to Tablespoons
3.) Change 45 ml to tsps.
4.) Change 2 Tablespoons to ml
5.) Change 5 Tablespoons to tsp
You can still ask an expert for help

Expert Community at Your Service

  • Live experts 24/7
  • Questions are typically answered in as fast as 30 minutes
  • Personalized clear answers
Learn more

Solve your problem for the price of one coffee

  • Available 24/7
  • Math expert for every subject
  • Pay only if we can solve it
Ask Question

Answers (1)

Ashly Sanford
Answered 2022-09-15 Author has 8 answers
Solution 1: Change 3 oz to table spoons
Formula: 1 oz =2 table spoons
3  oz = 2 × 3 = 6  table spoons
Solution 2: Change 12 tsps to table spoons
Formula: 3 tsps=1table spoons
12  tsps = 12 3 = 4  table spoons
Solution 3: Change 45 ml to tsps
Formula: 4.929 ml=1 tsps
45  ml = 45 4.929 = 9.13  tsps
Solution 4: Change 2 table spoons to ml
Formula: 1 table spoon =14.79 ml
2  table spoon = 2 × 14.79 = 29.58  ml
Solution 5: Change 5 table spoons to tsp
5  table spoon = 5 × 3 = 15  teaspoons

We have step-by-step solutions for your answer!

Expert Community at Your Service

  • Live experts 24/7
  • Questions are typically answered in as fast as 30 minutes
  • Personalized clear answers
Learn more

You might be interested in

asked 2022-06-04
So my task is the following: Consider a sequence of random variables ( X n ) n N with X n a . s . X and X n B a.s. for B R . Show that X n L p X for all p N .

My ideas till now:
1. In a first step i tried to show that the expected value is bounded by both sides from zero: 0 E ( | X n X | p ) 0 Problem here is that i would need that | X n | B a.s.
2. My second attempt was to use the dominated convergence theorem. With Y n = B it follows that if Y = B that Y n a . s . Y and E ( | Y n Y | ). Now I also need that | X n | Y and then it follows that E ( | X n X | ) n 0.

Probably someone can give me a hint or another way of solving this.
asked 2022-07-10
I am trying to understand the following equality involving probability measures in Wikipedia:
μ ν = | μ ν | ( X ) = 2 sup { | μ ( A ) ν ( A ) | : A Σ }
where the total variation norm and the total variation of a measure | | are defined in the some articles. The article has been flagged for not citing sources or offering a proof.
I have found a proof of a similar result for discrete probability distributions (1). But I have not been able to adapt it to continuous probability distributions, which is the result above.
asked 2022-04-10
Suppose that X is a real-valued random variable on the probability space ( Ω , F , P ) with a cumulative distribution function F X ( x ) = P [ X x ]. Can we conclude from some measure theoretic property that P [ X x ] = P [ X < x ]? The measure zero of singleton points is certainly true for many well-known measures, but can we conclude that in general, subtracting a finite number of points from ( , x ] does not change the probability of ( , x ]?
I'm asking this because my reading material hasn't explicitly taken care of this, and from other courses I know that P [ x X x ] = F X ( x ) F X ( x ), but arguing only with the general properties of probability measures I know of, yields P [ x X x ] = P [ X x ] P [ X < x ], where the RHS would simplify to include only the CDF of X, if the finite difference of points doesn't matter.
asked 2022-04-11
Transforming raw scores into z scores allows researchers to:
Question 24 options:
determine the significance of a statistical analysis.
describe the typical score in a set of scores.
compare variables measured on different units of measurement.
compare variables measured on the same units of measurement.
asked 2022-07-05
If I have m measurements to estimate an n dimensional state vector, and I am using Kalman filter to do the filtering, then: Should I put all the m measurements together in the measurement matrix (measurement transformation matrix ) and perform the filtering or, should I filter each measurement sequentially? Please provide some supporting explanation for your choice.
For e.g: Let m = 2 and n = 3. The state vector is 3 dimensional and we need to use the two measurements to get the posterior estimate the state vector. Now I can use one of these two methods:

1. Use all these measurements together to form a gain matrix of size 3 × 2.
2. Use one measurement at one time and perform the filtering two times. The gain matrix will be 3 × 1 in this case.

Which of the two methods is a better choice?
asked 2022-03-26
Determine which of the four levels of measurement (nominal, ordinal, interval, ratio) is most appropriate.
Makes of computers
Choose the correct level of measurement.
A. Nominal
В. Ratio
C. Interval
D. Ordinal
asked 2022-06-25
It is my understanding that σ-algebras are necessary to satisfy certain desired properties of a measure, and that these conditions are mutually inconsistent if we consider arbitrary open sets of R . However, I have also read that power set of a set is necessarily a σ-algebra, so how come we cannot use the power set of R to define a measure space? I feel I am missing something fundamental here.

New questions