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
Answer:
the second one
Step-by-step explanation:
the last number of the equation (-3) is the y intercept, so it goes the the point (0,-3), also it has the opposite slope of y=2x-3
i hope this helps and im sorry if im wrong :(
I see two ways to do it.
First, you have to understand that when you see a 'complex fraction' like this, the top number is a numerator, and the two bottom numbers are both denominators.
Way-1:
Take the top fraction . . . 2/2 . That's equal to 1 . So the whole thing is <em>1/3</em>.
Way-2:
Multiply the bottom two denominators. Then the whole thing is 2/(2·3) . That's the same thing as 2/6 . Simplify that, and you have <em>1/3</em> .
Answer: 15.9
Step-by-step explanation:
Hola!
La respuesta a esta ecuación es: x=20
