Answer:
Step-by-step explanation:
Answer:122
Step-by-step explanation:
Answer:
n = 4
Step-by-step explanation:
Where's a or did you mean n?
What is the flaw in Gina’s proof?
A) Points D and E must be constructed, not simply labeled, as midpoints.
B) Segments DE and AC are parallel by construction. THIS IS THE FLAW. THE SEGMENTS WERE NOT DRAWN NOR PROPERLY IDENTIFIED.
C) The slope of segments DE and AC is not 0.
D) The coordinates of D and E were found using the Distance between Two Points Postulate
In an arithmetic sequence, the difference between consecutive terms is constant. In formulas, there exists a number
such that
data:image/s3,"s3://crabby-images/4ee00/4ee0065d7a89ac34614779ffb7e192208530e1d9" alt="a_{n+1}-a_n=r\quad \forall n\geq 1"
In an geometric sequence, the ratio between consecutive terms is constant. In formulas, there exists a number
such that
data:image/s3,"s3://crabby-images/20468/204682ffbe7b7222b148a3324282b6f127ec823f" alt="\dfrac{a_{n+1}}{a_n}=r\quad \forall n\geq 1"
So, there exists infinite sequences that are not arithmetic nor geometric. Simply choose a sequence where neither the difference nor the ratio between consecutive terms is constant.
For example, any sequence starting with
data:image/s3,"s3://crabby-images/a2efe/a2efe90f0533928c26df57d78a936f377332da6d" alt="1, 15, -3,\ldots"
Won't be arithmetic nor geometric. It's not arithmetic (no matter how you continue it, indefinitely), because the difference between the first two numbers is 14, and between the second and the third is -18, and thus it's not constant. It's not geometric either, because the ratio between the first two numbers is 15, and between the second and the third is -1/5, and thus it's not constant.