4bethany incorrectly simplified the following expression.
(4 x 10'')(3 x 10-14) + 0.5
which of bethany's steps show an error based solely on her previous step?
choose all that apply.
a step 1: (4 x 10'')(3 x 10-14) + (5 x 10-5
b step 2: (12 x 10-) + (5 x 10-5)
c step 3: (120 x 10-4) + (5 x 10-5)
(d) step 4: (120 x 10-4) + (50 x 10-4)
© step 5: 170 x 10-8
step 6: 1.7 x 10-6

answer is because 4×10=40

and 98×4= is 392

40,392

no oblique asymptote

step-by-step explanation:

to find the oblique asymptote of f(x)

here numerator has degree 1 and denomintor degree 2

degree of numerator < degree of denominator

hence there is no oblique asymptote

when the degree of the denominator > that of the numerator, we saw that the value in the denominator got so much bigger, so quickly,   giving us a horizontal asymptote of the x-axis. or we can write

f(x) = a polynomial of x + a proper fraction.

in this case only we have oblique asymptotes but not when numerator has less degree.

a reflection across line m

step-by-step explanation:

the first transformation is a 90 degree rotation counterclockwise around the point g. this gets to image gh'j'k'. when the image gh'j'k' is reflected over the line  m the result is g'h"j"k". the final transformation is a reflection over the line  m.