What is the solution to the following system of equations? x + y +z = 8
x + 2y = 6
y+z=4

a-(4,1,3)
b-(3, 1,4)
c-(4,3,1)
d-(1,3,4)
PLEASE HELP ME I WILL GIVE BRAINLIEST

answer

a,b, and d

explanation

a reflection angle is more than

but less than;

an angle that measures

is a reflex angle.(true)

an angle that measures less than

is acute.(true)

provided we are considering angles greater or equal to zero.

an acute angle lies in the range.

an obtuse angle is less than 180° but more than 90°

an angle that measures 300° is obtuse (false)

an angle that measures 65° is an acute angle.(true)

answer: bearing in mind that a rectangle has a perimeter of length + length + width + width.

step-by-step explanation:

p = perimeter

l = length

x=width

p = 2l + 2x

p = 2(l+x)     < ==== perimeter of the base of the box.

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.

there still no table