1. Convert 40 miles per hours into feet per minute 2. A rectangular measures 60 inches by 78 inches. If you want to renovate it, how many square feet of flooring will you need to buy? Explain your solution in your own words.

propappeale00 2022-10-15 Answered
1. Convert 40 miles per hours into feet per minute
2. A rectangular measures 60 inches by 78 inches. If you want to renovate it, how many square feet of flooring will you need to buy? Explain your solution in your own words.
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)

silenthunter440
Answered 2022-10-16 Author has 19 answers
1). 1  mile = 63360  inch 1  mile = 63360 12  feet 1  mile = 5280  feet
Now, 1  hour = 60  minutes 1  mile/hr = 5280 60  feet/minutes 1  mile/hr = 88  feet/min
Hence, 40  mile/hr = ( 40 × 88 )  feet/min 40  mile/hr = 3520  feet/min
2). The dimension of rectangular closet is:
length  = 60  inches width  = 78  inches
Now the area of the closet is:
A = length  ×  width A = 60 × 78  square inches A = 4680  sq. inches
Now: 1  sq. feet = 144  sq.inch 1  sq.inch = 1 144  sq.feet 4680  sq.inch = 32.5  sq.feet
Hence 32.5 sq.feet of flooring needs to buy
Did you like this example?
Subscribe for all access

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 2022-05-13
Let { f k } k = 1 be a sequence of S -measurable real-valued functions on a measure space ( M , S ). Then the functions
lim sup k f k ( x )  and  lim inf k f k ( x )
are also S -measurable.
I already have proven this statement and my question is about something else. In the script it says that the reader may use the hint:
For a sequence { a k } k = 1 of real numbers the following is true:
lim sup k a k = lim k lim m max { a k , a k + 1 , , a m }
Now, I have not used this in my proof, but I can assure you, that my proof is airtight nonetheless. Anyway, can someone point out why this holds? I have not seen this equality before and did not know that one can present lim sup , lim inf like that. I know that for a set of limit points H we can say that lim sup H = max H and vice versa. I do not even see how this property can be useful for our proof.
asked 2022-05-14
Any help!
Let F , G be σ-algebras on a set Ω. We define the join and meet of F and G to be
F G := σ ( F G )
and
F G := F G ,
respectively.

However, how is F G defined? Is it
(1) { A : A F  and  A G }
or
(2) { A B : A F  and  B G } ?

In the theory of sets, I think it should be (1). But wouldn't it make much more sense to define F G to be (2)?
Note that (2) is not a σ-algebra (or am I missing something?), but the σ-algebra generated by (2) is actually F G . On the other hand, (1) is itself a σ-algebra.
asked 2022-06-22
Assume that X is uniformly distributed on (0, 1) and that the conditional distribution of Y given X=x is a binomial distribution with parameters (n,x). Then we say that Y has a binomial distribution with fixed size n and random probability parameter.
I have to find the marginal distribution of Y. So I have to use that:
P ( Y = y ) = x = y P ( Y = y | X = x ) P ( X = x )
But when we have that X is uniformly distributed I think the sum becomes a integral so we get:
P ( Y = y ) = 0 1 ( n y ) x y ( 1 x ) n y d x
But what to do next? I think maybe take the binomial coefficient out from the integral, but how then using this to find the marginal distribution of Y? Hope anyone can help me? Do I also have to use that Y has a binomial distribution with fixed size n and random probability parameter?
asked 2022-05-25
Let μ be a finite premeasure on an algebra S , and μ the induced outer measure. Show that a subset E of X is μ -measurable if and only if for each ε > 0 there is a set A S δ , A E, such that μ ( E A ) < ε.
Primarily my question is: is this even true? This seems like it's stated backward. I'm a noob so maybe I have this wrong, but since S δ is the set of all intersections of sets in S , then I would have thought that we were looking for a set E A. When I try to do the proof that seems like the direction that pops out naturally. Also we claim "There is a G δ set G containing E for which ..."
But when I look up the errata, this is not mentioned in it.
If the answer is "the book stated it correctly" then I'd appreciate a hint. I've tried using the sequence of sets such that μ ( E ) ε < μ ( E k ) where { E k } covers E. Intersecting these seems like a dead-end. I could union them, prove the theorem for E B, and then try to use B to construct A. But any way that I can see of doing that, I lose the property that A S δ .
asked 2021-02-26
What is the relationship between the accuracy and uncertainty of a measurement?
asked 2022-10-22
2. Convert 1.0 m g m m 2 into k g m m 2 . Solution provided by Mr. Awesome:
1.0 m g m m 2 = 1.0 m g m m 2 = 1.0 m g m m 2 × 10 6 k g 1 m g × 1000 m m m = 1.0 × 10 3 k g m = 1.0 × 10 3 k g m 2
asked 2022-07-23
The person who is 70 inches tall cast a shadow is 54 inches long. If a tree casts a shadow that is 28 feet long at te same time, then how tall is the tree to the nearest foot?