Veterinary doctors marked 50 deer and released them. later on they counted 200 deer, 22 where marked. to the nearest whole number, what is the best estimate for the deer population. plz slove and show the answer you plz don't skip this question i really need ! u : )

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?

The variable z is directly proportional to x, and inversely proportional to y. when x is 4 and y is 13, z has the value 1.2307692307692. what is the value of z when x= 9, and y= 20

The square root of 9x plus 7 plus the square rot of 2x equall to 7