Asked by pls donate
Use the table to answer the question. Red Marbles Blue Marbles 4 5 12 15 32 40 This two-column table displays the number of red marbles and blue marbles in a bag. What is an equivalent part-to-part ratio? (1 point) Responses 25 red:24 blue ratio of 25 red to 24 blue 24 red:25 blue ratio of 24 red to 25 blue 60 red:48 blue ratio of 60 red to 48 blue 48 red:60 blue
Answers
Answered by
pls donate
Just answer
Answered by
pls donate
r u sure
Answered by
pls donate
Im just making sure its right so is this right?
Answered by
pls donate
Use the table to answer the question. 7 10 70 100 Display the missing equivalent part-to-part ratios in this two-column table. (1 point) Responses 13:10 and 45:42 ratio of 13 to 10 and ratio of 45 to 42 20:14 and 80:56 ratio of 20 to 14 and ratio of 80 to 56 10:13 and 42:45 ratio of 10 to 13 and ratio of 42 to 45 14:20 and 56:80
Answered by
GPT-4o mini
To find an equivalent part-to-part ratio for the given numbers of red and blue marbles, first we need to find the total number of red and blue marbles.
From the table:
- Red Marbles: 4, 12, 32
- Blue Marbles: 5, 15, 40
In total, this is:
- Red: \(4 + 12 + 32 = 48\)
- Blue: \(5 + 15 + 40 = 60\)
Now, we can find the part-to-part ratio of red to blue marbles:
- The ratio of red to blue is \(48 : 60\).
To check if any of the responses are equivalent to this ratio, notice that we can reduce the ratio \(48 : 60\) by dividing both numbers by their greatest common divisor (GCD), which is 12:
\[
\frac{48 \div 12}{60 \div 12} = \frac{4}{5}
\]
However, since we are interested in expressing the same ratio in another form or identifying the equivalent from the given options, let’s also express the ratio in terms of whole numbers without reduction.
**Possible equivalent ratios from the table options given:**
1. **25 red:24 blue ratio of 25 red to 24 blue** — Not equivalent.
2. **24 red:25 blue ratio of 24 red to 25 blue** — Not equivalent.
3. **60 red:48 blue ratio of 60 red to 48 blue** — This is equivalent as it is just the reverse of \(48 : 60\).
4. **48 red:60 blue** — This is the original ratio we calculated.
Thus, the closest equivalent part-to-part ratio is **60 red:48 blue**, which is also the same ratio as \(48:60\) when reversed.
**Final answer: 60 red:48 blue**, ratio of 60 red to 48 blue.
From the table:
- Red Marbles: 4, 12, 32
- Blue Marbles: 5, 15, 40
In total, this is:
- Red: \(4 + 12 + 32 = 48\)
- Blue: \(5 + 15 + 40 = 60\)
Now, we can find the part-to-part ratio of red to blue marbles:
- The ratio of red to blue is \(48 : 60\).
To check if any of the responses are equivalent to this ratio, notice that we can reduce the ratio \(48 : 60\) by dividing both numbers by their greatest common divisor (GCD), which is 12:
\[
\frac{48 \div 12}{60 \div 12} = \frac{4}{5}
\]
However, since we are interested in expressing the same ratio in another form or identifying the equivalent from the given options, let’s also express the ratio in terms of whole numbers without reduction.
**Possible equivalent ratios from the table options given:**
1. **25 red:24 blue ratio of 25 red to 24 blue** — Not equivalent.
2. **24 red:25 blue ratio of 24 red to 25 blue** — Not equivalent.
3. **60 red:48 blue ratio of 60 red to 48 blue** — This is equivalent as it is just the reverse of \(48 : 60\).
4. **48 red:60 blue** — This is the original ratio we calculated.
Thus, the closest equivalent part-to-part ratio is **60 red:48 blue**, which is also the same ratio as \(48:60\) when reversed.
**Final answer: 60 red:48 blue**, ratio of 60 red to 48 blue.
Answered by
GPT-4o mini
60 red:48 blue
Answered by
GPT-4o mini
Apologies for any confusion. The correct equivalent part-to-part ratio based on the totals (48 red and 60 blue) is **48 red:60 blue**. Thank you for your patience!
Answered by
GPT-4o mini
Yes, the part-to-part ratio of **48 red:60 blue** is indeed correct based on the totals from the marbles given. If you needed the equivalent ratio expressed differently, such as 4:5 (since both 48 and 60 can be simplified), that would also work.
So, to clarify:
- The ratio from your totals is **48 red:60 blue**.
- It can also be simplified to **4:5**.
Both are correct in their respective contexts. If you are looking for the ratio in the options given earlier, then **48 red:60 blue** is what was calculated directly from your figures. Thank you for confirming!
So, to clarify:
- The ratio from your totals is **48 red:60 blue**.
- It can also be simplified to **4:5**.
Both are correct in their respective contexts. If you are looking for the ratio in the options given earlier, then **48 red:60 blue** is what was calculated directly from your figures. Thank you for confirming!
Answered by
GPT-4o mini
To find the missing equivalent part-to-part ratios based on the values given (7 and 10 in the first column, and 70 and 100 in the second column), we can determine the ratios.
1. The first pair is **7** and **10**. The ratio can be expressed as:
\[
\frac{7}{10}
\]
2. The second pair is **70** and **100**. The ratio can be expressed as:
\[
\frac{70}{100} = \frac{7}{10} \text{ (by simplifying)}
\]
Both pairs (7 & 10) and (70 & 100) maintain the same ratio of \(7:10\).
Next, we can find other equivalent ratios. If we calculate them based on that found ratio:
1. For \(7:10\), we can multiply both numbers by 2:
- \(14:20\)
2. We can also multiply \(7:10\) by 10:
- \(70:100\)
Now let's evaluate the provided options:
1. **13:10 and 45:42** — Not equivalent.
2. **20:14 and 80:56** — Not equivalent.
3. **10:13 and 42:45** — Not equivalent.
4. **14:20 and 56:80** — The second part is not correct since \(56\) is not an equivalent to \(100\).
From these options, **14:20** is the only correct equivalent ratio from the pairs we derived (7:10). To find another equivalent ratio from 7:10, one could also multiply by a different factor.
However, in this case, there seems to be no exact match for the second ratio using the listed options.
Please check for any adjustments, but based on the calculations, the most relevant ratio would be **14:20**.
If comparing strictly the pairs:
- The expected equivalent ratios based on available options listed don’t seem to match adequately besides **14:20** being the correct form generated from \(7:10\).
Can you kindly verify the options or provide more context?
1. The first pair is **7** and **10**. The ratio can be expressed as:
\[
\frac{7}{10}
\]
2. The second pair is **70** and **100**. The ratio can be expressed as:
\[
\frac{70}{100} = \frac{7}{10} \text{ (by simplifying)}
\]
Both pairs (7 & 10) and (70 & 100) maintain the same ratio of \(7:10\).
Next, we can find other equivalent ratios. If we calculate them based on that found ratio:
1. For \(7:10\), we can multiply both numbers by 2:
- \(14:20\)
2. We can also multiply \(7:10\) by 10:
- \(70:100\)
Now let's evaluate the provided options:
1. **13:10 and 45:42** — Not equivalent.
2. **20:14 and 80:56** — Not equivalent.
3. **10:13 and 42:45** — Not equivalent.
4. **14:20 and 56:80** — The second part is not correct since \(56\) is not an equivalent to \(100\).
From these options, **14:20** is the only correct equivalent ratio from the pairs we derived (7:10). To find another equivalent ratio from 7:10, one could also multiply by a different factor.
However, in this case, there seems to be no exact match for the second ratio using the listed options.
Please check for any adjustments, but based on the calculations, the most relevant ratio would be **14:20**.
If comparing strictly the pairs:
- The expected equivalent ratios based on available options listed don’t seem to match adequately besides **14:20** being the correct form generated from \(7:10\).
Can you kindly verify the options or provide more context?
Submit Your Answer
We prioritize human answers over AI answers.
If you are human, and you can answer this question, please submit your answer.