The graph below shows Wilson's science scores versus the number of hours spent doing science homework: A graph titled Wilsons Science Scores shows Hours of Practice in a Week on x axis and Science Scores on y axis. The x axis scale is shown from 0 to 5 at increments of 1, and the y axis scale is shown from 0 to 50 at increments of 5.The ordered pairs 0, 15 and 0.5, 18 and 1, 18 and 1.5, 25 and 2, 30 and 2.5, 35 and 3, 40 and 3.5, 43 and 4, 41 and 4.5, 45 and 5, 48 are shown on the graph. A straight line joins the ordered pairs 0, 14.9 and 5, 50. What will most likely be Wilson's approximate science score if he does science homework for 6 hours a week?

the correct answer is 5

jgfjttgbgcfbc

step-by-step explanation:

h56

j

jgh

j

gh

hnh

vnf

i think it's eleven too, don't woosh me here, but according to the "experts" it's 2.

the proof starts from the peano postulates, which define the natural

numbers n. n is the smallest set satisfying these postulates:

  p1.   1 is in n.

  p2.   if x is in n, then its "successor" x' is in n.

  p3.   there is no x such that x' = 1.

  p4.   if x isn't 1, then there is a y in n such that y' = x.

  p5.   if s is a subset of n, 1 is in s, and the implication

      (x in s => x' in s) holds, then s = n.

then you have to define addition recursively:

  def: let a and b be in n. if b = 1, then define a + b = a'

      (using p1 and p2). if b isn't 1, then let c' = b, with c in n

      (using p4), and define a + b = (a + c)'.

then you have to define 2:

  def:   2 = 1'

2 is in n by p1, p2, and the definition of 2.

theorem:   1 + 1 = 2

proof: use the first part of the definition of + with a = b = 1.

      then 1 + 1 = 1' = 2   q.e.d.

note: there is an alternate formulation of the peano postulates which

replaces 1 with 0 in p1, p3, p4, and p5. then you have to change the

definition of addition to this:

  def: let a and b be in n. if b = 0, then define a + b = a.

      if b isn't 0, then let c' = b, with c in n, and define

      a + b = (a + c)'.

you also have to define 1 = 0', and 2 = 1'. then the proof of the

theorem above is a little different:

proof: use the second part of the definition of + first:

      1 + 1 = (1 + 0)'

      now use the first part of the definition of + on the sum in

      parentheses:   1 + 1 = (1)' = 1' = 2   q.e.d.