Use the drawing tool to form the correct answer on the provided numbertine More and Keith are remodeling an old mansion surrounded by a tall stone wall. They need to purchase a ladder that can reach the top of the
wall but are unsure what length is required. Mac knows the height of the wall is 15 feet Keith estimates the angle of inclination between the
bader and the ground must be between 30 and 36: The situation is shown in the image below
IS
wa
Back
DOU
Use the number line below to plot the range of possible values for the length of the ladder that meets the top of the wall Round each tength to
the nearest integer
kona o bening
Undo
Rest
Drawing Tools
Select
Point
Line Segment
N21
22 23

but which class are u may know that first

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.

yes, gavin is right.

step-by-step explanation:

gavin is correct. 

this problem is about converting 9% per year to how many percent per quarter. the rate is still the same. it only differed in the time period. so, through dimensional analysis,

9% per year  × (1 year / 4 quarters) = 2.25% per quarter

if he was asked to convert 9% per year to how many percent per quarter  compounded quarterly, then you will not simply divide by four. this is because compounding is not linear.

hope this , have a good day. c;

2x+60=

step-by-step explanation: