0
Quincey says that 3 is a good estimate for 3.4 times 0.09 is he correct Why?
Wiki User
∙ 9y ago
3 is not a good estimate for 3.4 times 0.09 because, the result of 3.4 times 0.09 is 0.306.
Wiki User
∙ 9y ago
SITI NUR ZAHARAH BIN...
0.306
Add your answer:
Earn +20 pts
Why is 2 not a good estimate for 13.68 times 0.04?
The answer being 0.5456, the digit 2 can not be a good estimate since it is not close.
Is 4 a good estimate for 158 41?
If I assume that you're talking about 158 / 41 then my quick answer is yes, it is a good estimate. 4 times 41 is 164 which is closer to 158 than 3 times 41 (123) and 5 times 41 (205). Final summary: 4 is a good estimate for 158 / 41 because it is the closest whole number to the real answer.
Give one good reason why 2800 is not a good estimate for 702 x 43?
the answer would have had 5 digits
Which is correct he is good at math or he is good in math?
He is good at math
Why is 2700 is not a good estimate for 903 times 29?
It's off by an order of magnitude. Should be near 27,000, not 2,700. Checking now... it's 26,187, to be precise.
What is a good good estimate for 11 times 351?
10 times 351 = 3510 The real answer will be 351 more than that. Estimate 3861
Is 2700 a good estimate for 903 times 9?
No
What is a good estimate for 2745 times 6.9?
21,000
Why is 2 not a good estimate for 13.68 times 0.04?
The answer being 0.5456, the digit 2 can not be a good estimate since it is not close.
Why would you want your estimate to be greater than your actual answer?
There is no good reason. There are times when you would and times when you would not.
Is 4 a good estimate for 158 41?
If I assume that you're talking about 158 / 41 then my quick answer is yes, it is a good estimate. 4 times 41 is 164 which is closer to 158 than 3 times 41 (123) and 5 times 41 (205). Final summary: 4 is a good estimate for 158 / 41 because it is the closest whole number to the real answer.
Is it correct in English to say someone does good?
This depends on which context you are using 'does good' in. For example, if you said that a person 'does good' things, it would be grammatically correct. But if you said someone 'does good' without inferring that they are doing good THINGS, and not just GOOD, then it would not be using correct English. Isn't the English language confusing at times?!? :)
Is 3 a good estimate for 3.4 times 0.09?
It would be if 0.09 rounded to 1. But since 0.09 rounds to 0.1, estimate 0.3
How many times did the United States declare war in the years 1900-2000?
if i am correct, i am sure we have declared war about 4 or 5 times. Good question.
Is this sentence correct he are good?
"He is good" is correct. 'He' is singular, 'are' is for plurals.
Which is correct grammar - you were looking good or you was looking good.?
"You were looking good" is grammatically correct.
Some are good is correct or not?
Incorrect. Correct is, Some is correct.
