The objective of this problem is to compare second-order accurate forward, backward, and centered finite difference approximations (three-point formulae) of the first deriva-tive of a function to the actual value of the derivative. This will be done forf(x) = 5e−2x.(a) Use calculus to determine the correct value of the derivative atx= 2.

the answer would be 1 1/72

step-by-step explanation:

you can rewrite the equation by separating the parts and then solving individually:

10-9=1

1/8 - 1/9=

find l c d and then combine:

1 1/72

c. y = 1/4 x + 5

step-by-step explanation:

first, put the equation of the line on the graph into slope-intercept form

(y = mx + b):   y = -4x + 8

second, a perpendicular line has to have "an opposite/reciprocal slope" to the original slope. so, find the "m" value in your original equation (it's -4, right? )

original slope: m = -4   perpendicular slope: change the sign to its opposite and find the reciprocal ("flip" the number)

new slope is now positive (b/c the original slope was negative 4), and it's 1/4 (not the original slope of 4 or 4/1)

segment bisector

step-by-step explanation:

line segment bisector. definition: a line, ray or segment which cuts another line segment into two equal parts. try this drag one of the orange dots at a or b and note the the line ab always divides the line pq into two equal parts.

mark brainliest!

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.