Find the inverse of square root f(n) = n – 3. Of(n) = (n + 3)
Of-1 (n) = yn +1
Of-1 (n) = -n° +1
Of-1 (n) = -n3 – 3

Here is their argument. given the obtuse angle x, we make a quadrilateral abcd with ∠dab = x, and ∠abc = 90◦, and ad = bc. say the perpendicular bisector to dc meets the perpendicular bisector to ab at p. then pa = pb and pc = pd. so the triangles pad and pbc have equal sides and are congruent. thus ∠pad = ∠pbc. but pab is isosceles, hence ∠pab = ∠pba. subtracting, gives x = ∠pad−∠pab = ∠pbc −∠pba = 90◦. this is a preposterous conclusion – just where is the mistake in the "proof" and why does the argument break down there?

Which of the following would be a good name for the function that takes the weight of a box and returns the energy needed to lift it?

Simplify. 4+3/7x-2-2/7x a. 2-5/7x b. 6-1/7x c. 2+1/7x d. 6+5/7x