The answer is one hundred seventeen over three hundred twenty or 117/320
2x² + 6x - 3 + 2x³ - 3x + 2
Combine like terms
2x³ + 2x² + 6x - 3x - 3 + 2
Final answer:
2x³ + 2x² + 3x - 1
Answer:
c)The proof writer mentally assumed the conclusion. He wrote "suppose n is an arbitrary integer", but was really thinking "suppose n is an arbitrary integer, and suppose that for this n, there exists an integer k that satisfies n < k < n+2." Under those assumptions, it follows indeed that k must be n + 1, which justifies the word "therefore": but of course assuming the conclusion destroyed the validity of the proof.
Step-by-step explanation:
when we claim something as a hypothesis we can only conclude with therefore at the end of the proof. so assuming the conclusion nulify the proof from the beginning
Greetings from Brasil...
<em />
Here's our problem:
From potentiation properties:
Mᵃ ÷ Mᵇ = Mᵃ⁻ᵇ
<em>division of power of the same base: I repeat the base and subtract the exponents</em>
<em />
Bringing to our problem
12¹⁶ ÷ 12⁴
12¹⁶⁻⁴
<h2>12¹²</h2>
