Duplicate Question
The question on this page has been marked as a duplicate question.
Original Question
According to the Associative Property, which expression is equivalent to 30m+(21m−53)+(18−2m)?(1 point) Responses 51m+(−53+18)−...Question
According to the Associative Property, which expression is equivalent to 30m+(21m−53)+(18−2m)?(1 point)
Responses
51m+(−53+18)−2m
51 m plus left parenthesis negative 53 plus 18 right parenthesis minus 2 m
(30m+21m)+(18−2m)
left parenthesis 30 m plus 21 m right parenthesis plus left parenthesis 18 minus 2 m right parenthesis
53m−35
53 m minus 35
(49m−53)+16
Responses
51m+(−53+18)−2m
51 m plus left parenthesis negative 53 plus 18 right parenthesis minus 2 m
(30m+21m)+(18−2m)
left parenthesis 30 m plus 21 m right parenthesis plus left parenthesis 18 minus 2 m right parenthesis
53m−35
53 m minus 35
(49m−53)+16
Answers
There are no human answers yet.
Answered by
GPT-4o mini
To apply the Associative Property, we can regroup the terms in the expression \( 30m + (21m - 53) + (18 - 2m) \) without changing their order.
Let's start by simplifying the original expression:
\[
30m + (21m - 53) + (18 - 2m)
\]
First, we can combine like terms. Rearranging and grouping accordingly gives us:
\[
(30m + 21m - 2m) + (-53 + 18)
\]
Now, we can combine:
1. For the \(m\) terms:
\[
30m + 21m - 2m = 49m
\]
2. For the constants:
\[
-53 + 18 = -35
\]
Putting it all together, we get:
\[
49m - 35
\]
Let's compare this with the provided options:
1. **51m + (−53 + 18) - 2m**
- Not equivalent.
2. **(30m + 21m) + (18 - 2m)**
- This is equivalent based on the Associative Property, as it simply rearranges the terms.
3. **53m - 35**
- Not equivalent.
4. **(49m - 53) + 16**
- Not equivalent.
Thus, the expression **(30m + 21m) + (18 - 2m)** is equivalent to the original expression using the Associative Property.
Let's start by simplifying the original expression:
\[
30m + (21m - 53) + (18 - 2m)
\]
First, we can combine like terms. Rearranging and grouping accordingly gives us:
\[
(30m + 21m - 2m) + (-53 + 18)
\]
Now, we can combine:
1. For the \(m\) terms:
\[
30m + 21m - 2m = 49m
\]
2. For the constants:
\[
-53 + 18 = -35
\]
Putting it all together, we get:
\[
49m - 35
\]
Let's compare this with the provided options:
1. **51m + (−53 + 18) - 2m**
- Not equivalent.
2. **(30m + 21m) + (18 - 2m)**
- This is equivalent based on the Associative Property, as it simply rearranges the terms.
3. **53m - 35**
- Not equivalent.
4. **(49m - 53) + 16**
- Not equivalent.
Thus, the expression **(30m + 21m) + (18 - 2m)** is equivalent to the original expression using the Associative Property.
Submit Your Answer
We prioritize human answers over AI answers.
If you are human, and you can answer this question, please submit your answer.