Предмет: Математика, автор: Аноним

решить уравнения 3x-(x-7)=3x+6

Ответы

Автор ответа: chegodaevnick

0

Ответ:

Пошаговое объяснение:

3х-х+7=3х+6

-х=-1

х=1

Автор ответа: Ilyachurakov

0

Ответ:

x=1

Пошаговое объяснение:

2x+7=3x+6

3x-2x=7-6

x=1

Предыдущий вопрос

Следующий вопрос

Похожие вопросы

Предмет: Русский язык, автор: alyosha19103

переставь буквы в словах, чтобы получить новые слова: пашак, оживт, кюаб.

1 год назад

Предмет: Другие предметы, автор: varenitsasofa

ремесленное производство 16 век

1 год назад

Предмет: Английский язык, автор: КикбоксерАстраном

Переведите текст своими словами , на русский! Не точный перевод - просто передайте смысл
So I want to introduce you to a concept known as the
sunk cost fallacy. Imagine that you’re going to the store and you’re
halfway there when you realize, “Oh wait, the store is actually closed
today.” But you figure, “Well, I’ve already come ten blocks. I might
as well just go all the way to the store, you know, so that my ten
blocks of walking won’t have been wasted. Well, this is a transparently
silly way to reason and I doubt that any of us would actually go all
the way to a store that we knew was closed just because we’d already
gone ten blocks.

But this pattern of thinking is actually surprisingly
common in scenarios that are a little bit less obvious than the store
example. So, say you’re in a career and it’s becoming more and more
clear to you that this isn’t actually a fulfilling career for you.
You’d probably be happier somewhere else. But you figure I’ll just
stick with it because I don’t want my past ten years of effort and time
and money to have been wasted. So the time and money and effort and
whatever else you’ve already spent is what we call the sunk cost. It’s
gone no matter what you do going forward. And now you’re just trying to
decide given that I’ve already spent that money or time or whatever,
what choice is going to produce the best outcome for my future.
And the sunk cost fallacy then means making a choice
not based on what outcome you think is going to be the best going
forward but instead based on a desire not to see your past investment go
to waste.
Once you start paying attention to the sunk cost
fallacy you’ll probably notice at least a few things that you would like
to be doing differently. And maybe those will be small scale things
like, in my case, I now am much more willing to just abandon a book if a
hundred pages in I conclude that I’m not enjoying it and I’m, you know,
not getting any value out of it rather than trudging through the
remaining 200-300 pages of the book just because I don’t want, you know,
my past investment of a hundred pages, the time that I spent reading
those hundred pages to go to waste.

And you might notice some large things, too. For
example, I was in a Ph.D. program and started realizing, “Gee, this
really isn’t the field for me.” And you know, it’s a shame that I have
spent the last several years preparing for and working in this Ph.D.
program but I genuinely predict going forward that I’d be happier if I
switched to another field. And sometimes it really does take time to
fully acknowledge to yourself that you don’t have any good reason to
stick with the job or Ph.D. or project that you’ve been working on so
long because sunk costs are painful. But at least having the sunk cost
fallacy on your radar means that you have the opportunity at least to
push past that and make the choice that instead will lead to the better
outcomes for your future.

1 год назад

Предмет: Математика, автор: irina2543

Решите уравнение х-(2х+3)=6х-(4х-8)

8 лет назад

Предмет: Математика, автор: xcavadova2002

Задание 13с решением пж

8 лет назад