Explain why solving the equation - 3n - 4 = 2 is different from solving the inequality -3n - 4 < 2. How are the answers different?

please this is due in a few hours !!

Step-by-step explanation:

First get the answer to -3n - 4 = 2

-3n - 4 + 4 = 2 + 4

-3n = 6

n = 6/-3

n = -2

That answer is the only one that is permitted. It is the only one that completely satisfies the equation.

Now when you do the inequality, look what happens.

-3n - 4 < 2              Add 4 to both sides.

-3n-4+ 4 < 2+4

-3n < 6                  Now there are a bunch of ways (2) to solve this.  

                            No matter which way you do it, the arrow will change.

-3n/-3 > 6/-3

n > - 2

That means that any number that is greater than - 2 will satisfy the inequality.

So n = 0 will work. Even n = - 1 will work. Anything bigger than -2 will work. The equation does not provide that kind of latitude.

the answer   is 200

step-by-step explanation:

this is a problem about poisson probabilities.   i don't know if you've

already studied poisson distributions, or if you have a place to look

to read more about the subject.  

here's how you can see a poisson distribution coming.   when there are

a lot of events that may happen at any time (or any place), and when

you're counting how many of them happen at a particular time (or a

particular place), and each event is independent of the others, then

the result is a poisson distribution.   this is roughly true for the

chocolate chips; one chip being in a cookie has only a small effect on

the probability that another chip will be in the cookie.

once you know you have a poisson distribution, you know a lot.   there

is only one parameter to a poisson distribution, so if you know the

mean, you know everything.   the form of the distribution is

  probability of n chips = {[e^(-x)]*(x^n)} / (n! )