High School

We appreciate your visit to Bob Cal and Pete each made a stack of baseball cards Bob s stack was 0 2 meters high Cal s stack was 0 24. This page offers clear insights and highlights the essential aspects of the topic. Our goal is to provide a helpful and engaging learning experience. Explore the content and find the answers you need!

Bob, Cal, and Pete each made a stack of baseball cards.

- Bob's stack was 0.2 meters high.
- Cal's stack was 0.24 meters high.
- Pete's stack was 0.18 meters high.

Write a number sentence that compares Cal's stack of cards to Pete's stack.

Answer :

Answer:

0.24 > 0.18

Step-by-step explanation:

Given that,

Bob's stack = 0.2m

Cal's stack = 0.24m

Pete's stack = 0.18m

To find?

A number sentence.

A simple sentence is a string/collection of words that contain a subject and a verb whereas a number sentence is a sentence that consist of mathematical operation like +, -, /, * together with an equality such as =, <, >, and like a sentence it also tell a fact.

So, the number sentence that compares cal's stack of cards to Pete's stack is

0.24 > 0.18

Thanks for taking the time to read Bob Cal and Pete each made a stack of baseball cards Bob s stack was 0 2 meters high Cal s stack was 0 24. We hope the insights shared have been valuable and enhanced your understanding of the topic. Don�t hesitate to browse our website for more informative and engaging content!

Rewritten by : Barada

Answer:

The data that we have is:

Bob's stack is 0.2 meters high

Cal's stack is 0.24 meters high

Pete's stack is 0.18 meters high.

We want to compare Cal's stack with Pete's stack.

Direct comparison:

For this we do a subtraction, the height of Cal's stack minus the height of the one of Pete.

D = 0.24 m - 0.18 m = 0.06 m

So from this, we know that Cal's stack is 0.06 meters higher than the one of Pete.

Relative comparison: now we do the quotient of Cal's stack divided by Pete's stack.

R = 0.24/0.18 = 1.33

So Cal's stack height is equal to 1.33 times the height of the stack of Pete.

From this, we have