Alyssa received a $50 gift card and spent x dollars. Samantha received a $65 gift card and spent three times as many dollars as Alyssa.
If Alyssa and Samantha now have the same amount of money on their gift cards, how much money
did Alyssa spend in dollars and cents?

4

step-by-step explanation:

d) by the cross product property, ab^2 = bc multiplied by ad

step-by-step explanation:

we are given

in the given triangle abc

angle a is 90° and segment ad is perpendicular to segment bc

we can see that

triangle(abc) and triangle(abd) are similar because they have common side and same angle (90 degree)

so, triangles(abc) and abd are similar

since, they are similar

so, the ratio of their sides must be equal

we get

now, we can cross multiply

and we get

so, this could be step to prove it

step-by-step explanation:

graph using a few selected

x         y

-1       15

0         6

1         2.4

2       0.96

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.