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
I believe yo meant c=2pir but ok
c=2r
divide both sides by 2
c/2=r
if you forgot tthe pi
c=2pir
divide by 2pi
c/(2pi)=r
