Part B Javier experiments by mixing 24 Cups Of his special fertilizer with some kelp meal. The new mixture is kelp meal. Javier claims that the ratio of cottonseed, phosphate, wood ash, and limestone per cup are the same as in the original recipe. Is he correct? If not, what is the correct ratio of each ingredient per cup? Explain your reasoning.

4400

step-by-step explanation:

$650 per month plus utilities

step-by-step explanation:

just based on the info you gave, it would seem more cost effective to rent at $650 per month plus utilities.   if utilities are, in fact, $150 per month, your monthly living costs would be $800 as opposed to the other option of $825.

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.

a

step-by-step explanation:

given the 2 equations

- x + y = - 2 → (1)

2x - 3y = 4 → (2)

multiplying (1) by 2 and adding to (2) will eliminate the x- term

- 2x + 2y = - 4 → (3)

add (2) and (3) term by term

(2x - 2x) + (- 3y + 2y) = (4 - 4), simplifying gives

- y = 0 ⇒ y = 0

substitute y = 0 in either of the 2 equations for corresponding value of x

substituting in (2) gives

2x = 4 ( divide both sides by 2 )

x = 2

solution is (2, 0 ) → a