Module Two Discussion Topic: In Module Two we learn that arguments and explanations can be interconnected. One common interconnected structure results when a puzzling fact generates speculation about what explains that fact. In the motel explosion argument on p. 46 of Wright investigators speculate about what caused the explosion. The motel exploded because the maintenance worker probably ignited the propane. After all, he was severely injured. MP: The motel exploded. SP1: The maintenance worker probably ignited the propane. SP2: The maintenance worker was severely injured. What statement is the conclusion? What statement supports that conclusion?

the square root of what number? if you add that, then someone will probably answer the question.

yes the total will be same because in both of them the expression.is rearranged but their sign remains the same hence it hss just been shuffled

guess at question:

a vertical line intersects the graph of g(x,y) = 0 at two points. what conclusion follows about the function f(x) implicitly defined by g(x,f(x)) = 0?

the domain of f(x) cannot include the x coordinate of any such vertical line.

informally, f(x) is not a function, and

g(x,y)=0 cannot be solved for y uniquely.

the relation r = {(x,y) such that g(x,y) = 0} is a function if

for all (a,b) ∊ r and (c,d) ∊ r, a=c implies b=d.

step-by-step explanation:

answer: 1inch=7days  

12inch=12*7=84days

step-by-step explanation: