The scientific notation number of 0.00165

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?

If 1.4% of the mass of a human body is calcium, how many kilograms of calcium are there in a 165-pound man? 1.0 kg ca 5.1 kg ca 1.0 x 102 kg ca 5.1 x 102 kg ca

Sun country bus lines has 80000 shares of stock outstanding what would the dividend per share of stock be from a dividends declaration of 109600