Zach plotted 10 points on a scatter plot to investigate the relationship between two quantitative variables any used y equals 2x + 8 to model a relationship and the line is a very good fit which of these scenarios is most likely A. they're 2 points below the line and 8 points above the line

B. there are 5 points below the line and 5 Points above the line

C. there are 8 points below the line and 2 points above the line

D. there are 10 points below the line and 0 points above the line ​

i believe the correct answer is option 4.principalities were small territories that were run by russian rulers.

which statement correctly defines principalities in northern asia in the 1200s? principalities were small territories that were run by russian rulers.

hope i could ! : )

dalila is incorrect. the whisker on the left is very long, going all the way out to 5. the whisker goes from 5 to 30, so it has a spread of 25. the rest of the box plot values are closer together, so 5 is an outlier

i think it's eleven too, don't woosh me here, but according to the "experts" it's 2.

the proof starts from the peano postulates, which define the natural

numbers n. n is the smallest set satisfying these postulates:

  p1.   1 is in n.

  p2.   if x is in n, then its "successor" x' is in n.

  p3.   there is no x such that x' = 1.

  p4.   if x isn't 1, then there is a y in n such that y' = x.

  p5.   if s is a subset of n, 1 is in s, and the implication

      (x in s => x' in s) holds, then s = n.

then you have to define addition recursively:

  def: let a and b be in n. if b = 1, then define a + b = a'

      (using p1 and p2). if b isn't 1, then let c' = b, with c in n

      (using p4), and define a + b = (a + c)'.

then you have to define 2:

  def:   2 = 1'

2 is in n by p1, p2, and the definition of 2.

theorem:   1 + 1 = 2

proof: use the first part of the definition of + with a = b = 1.

      then 1 + 1 = 1' = 2   q.e.d.

note: there is an alternate formulation of the peano postulates which

replaces 1 with 0 in p1, p3, p4, and p5. then you have to change the

definition of addition to this:

  def: let a and b be in n. if b = 0, then define a + b = a.

      if b isn't 0, then let c' = b, with c in n, and define

      a + b = (a + c)'.

you also have to define 1 = 0', and 2 = 1'. then the proof of the

theorem above is a little different:

proof: use the second part of the definition of + first:

      1 + 1 = (1 + 0)'

      now use the first part of the definition of + on the sum in

      parentheses:   1 + 1 = (1)' = 1' = 2   q.e.d.

can i see a photo of the question so i can you?