dr silas studies a culture of bacteria under a microscope. the function b1(t)=1200(1.8)t represents the number of bacteria t hours after dr silas begins her study. (a) what does the value 1200 represent in this situation? (b) what does the value 1.8 represent in this situation? (c) the number of bacteria in a second study is modeled by the function b2(t)=1000(1.8)t. what does the value 1000 represent in this situation? what does the difference of 1200 and 1000 mean between the two studies?

6,250

step-by-step explanation:

to get the area, multiply 360 by 160.(57,600)

to find out how many bags of fertilizer it will take, first figure out how many square feet one bag can hold. divide 1000 by 8(125) to get the unit rate(how many square feet one pound of fertilizer can hold)and multiply it by 50(6250). if i haven't made a mistake, that is the answer.

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.

15.36 per mile

but forgot to round

i am pretty sure