Write a equation for 10 less than j is 35

You would write the equation as j - 10 = 35

You write the equation like that because 10 is less that j (subtract), or if you flip it around, j is greater by 10. And it's saying that 10 less than j IS 35, it is talking about 35 because the answer of the equation.

85.560%

step-by-step explanation:

conditional probability is defined as:

p(a|b) = p(a∩b) / p(b)

in other words, the probability that a occurs, given that b has occurred = the probability that both a and b occur / the probability that b occurs.

in this example:

p(turns 64 | turns 44) = p(turns 64 & turns 44) / p(turns 44).

if someone turns 64, they must have already turned 44, so:

p(turns 64 | turns 44) = p(turns 64) / p(turns 44)

on page 42, we see that of the original 100,000, 94944 turn 44, and 81234 turn 64.   therefore:

p(turns 64 | turns 44) = 81234 / 94944

p(turns 64 | turns 44) = 0.85560

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.