At Westonci.ca, we connect you with experts who provide detailed answers to your most pressing questions. Start exploring now! Get precise and detailed answers to your questions from a knowledgeable community of experts on our Q&A platform. Join our platform to connect with experts ready to provide precise answers to your questions in different areas.
Sagot :
To find the missing value in the third row of the table, let's review the relationship between the given columns and results for the first two rows. We need a pattern or a rule that connects the values:
[tex]\[ \begin{array}{|c|c|c|} \hline 4 & 3 & 70 \\ \hline 15 & 8 & 359 \\ \hline 5 & 10 & ? \\ \hline \end{array} \][/tex]
Observing the first row, we have:
[tex]\[ 4 \times 3 + \text{something} = 70 \][/tex]
Let's denote "something" as \( S \).
[tex]\[ 4 \times 3 + S = 70 \][/tex]
[tex]\[ 12 + S = 70 \][/tex]
[tex]\[ S = 70 - 12 \][/tex]
[tex]\[ S = 58 \][/tex]
Now, let's verify \( S \) using the second row:
[tex]\[ 15 \times 8 + S = 359 \][/tex]
[tex]\[ 120 + S = 359 \][/tex]
[tex]\[ S = 359 - 120 \][/tex]
[tex]\[ S = 239 \][/tex]
Since the value of \( S \) calculated from the first and second rows do not match, our assumption about a simple additive constant must be incorrect. Consequently, there is no consistent value of \( S \) that fits both rows' patterns. Therefore, without a consistent rule or pattern, determining the result for the third row is not possible.
Given the inconsistent results, there isn't enough information to derive a definitive pattern for these operations, which leads us to conclude:
[tex]\[ \boxed{\text{None}} \][/tex]
Hence, among the provided choices:
(a) 115
(b) 125
(c) 130
(d) 145
None of these appear to be accurate based on the established pattern.
[tex]\[ \begin{array}{|c|c|c|} \hline 4 & 3 & 70 \\ \hline 15 & 8 & 359 \\ \hline 5 & 10 & ? \\ \hline \end{array} \][/tex]
Observing the first row, we have:
[tex]\[ 4 \times 3 + \text{something} = 70 \][/tex]
Let's denote "something" as \( S \).
[tex]\[ 4 \times 3 + S = 70 \][/tex]
[tex]\[ 12 + S = 70 \][/tex]
[tex]\[ S = 70 - 12 \][/tex]
[tex]\[ S = 58 \][/tex]
Now, let's verify \( S \) using the second row:
[tex]\[ 15 \times 8 + S = 359 \][/tex]
[tex]\[ 120 + S = 359 \][/tex]
[tex]\[ S = 359 - 120 \][/tex]
[tex]\[ S = 239 \][/tex]
Since the value of \( S \) calculated from the first and second rows do not match, our assumption about a simple additive constant must be incorrect. Consequently, there is no consistent value of \( S \) that fits both rows' patterns. Therefore, without a consistent rule or pattern, determining the result for the third row is not possible.
Given the inconsistent results, there isn't enough information to derive a definitive pattern for these operations, which leads us to conclude:
[tex]\[ \boxed{\text{None}} \][/tex]
Hence, among the provided choices:
(a) 115
(b) 125
(c) 130
(d) 145
None of these appear to be accurate based on the established pattern.
We appreciate your time on our site. Don't hesitate to return whenever you have more questions or need further clarification. Your visit means a lot to us. Don't hesitate to return for more reliable answers to any questions you may have. Get the answers you need at Westonci.ca. Stay informed with our latest expert advice.