P(z<1.6480441)=

Please solve I don’t have a graphing calculator

, and

for

step-by-step explanation:

we can analyze the pattern at which the terms increase. let us denote , , , so that we can call

note the following:

the pattern: to get the next term value, we just add the next term number (e.g. 1st, 2nd, to the previous term value (term values are the given numbers in the question, 1, 3, 6, 10, 15,

from , to get to , we add

from , to get to , we add

etc.

we need to form a recursive formula, a formula that has the next term as a function of the previous term. so a possible recursive formula can be

, and for

you are uyytr tyy

step-by-step explanation:

company a

step-by-step explanation:

using the linear regression models , it is found that company a   pays about $14 more. but using the same regression (linear) company b pays about $10 more.

so company a pays more than b

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.