` simply sin(y)/(cos(y)+1)+sin(y)/(cos(y)-1) = -2/(tan(y))`

Here is their argument. given the obtuse angle x, we make a quadrilateral abcd with ∠dab = x, and ∠abc = 90◦, and ad = bc. say the perpendicular bisector to dc meets the perpendicular bisector to ab at p. then pa = pb and pc = pd. so the triangles pad and pbc have equal sides and are congruent. thus ∠pad = ∠pbc. but pab is isosceles, hence ∠pab = ∠pba. subtracting, gives x = ∠pad−∠pab = ∠pbc −∠pba = 90◦. this is a preposterous conclusion – just where is the mistake in the "proof" and why does the argument break down there?

At the beginning of 1974/75,2 years a man invested #2000 in a bank at 12.5% compound interest, if it degree #650 at the end of each two years to pay his son's school fees, after payment of interest to pay his son's school fees, how much did he have left at the beginning of the 1978/79 school year?

Evaluate the expression. (9 + 5)(3 + 2)0