David invested $340 in an account paying an interest rate of 2\tfrac{1}{8}2 8 1 % compounded continuously. Natalie invested $340 in an account paying an interest rate of 2\tfrac{3}{4}2 4 3 % compounded quarterly. After 17 years, how much more money would Natalie have in her account than David, to the nearest dollar?

$53.83

Step-by-step explanation:

For David

David invested $340 in an account paying an interest rate of 2\tfrac{1}{8}2 8 1 % compounded continuously.

r = 2 1/8% = 17/8% = 2.125% = 0.02125

t = 17 years

P = $340

For Compounded continuously, the formula =

A = Pe^rt

A = Amount Invested after time t

P = Principal

r = interest rate

t = time

A = $340 × e^0.02125 × 17

A = $ 487.94

For Natalie

Natalie invested $340 in an account paying an interest rate of 2\tfrac{3}{4}2 4 3 % compounded quarterly.

r = 2 3/4 % = 11/4% = 2.75% = 0.0275

t = 17 years

P = $340

n = compounded quarterly = 4 times

Hence,

Compound Interest formula =

A = P(1 + r/n)^nt

A = Amount Invested after time t

P = Principal

r = interest rate

n = compounding frequency

t = time

A = $340 (1 + 0.0275/4) ^17 × 4

A = $ 541.77

After 17 years, how much more money would Natalie have in her account than David, to the nearest dollar?

This is calculated as

$541.77 - $ 487.94

= $53.83

Hence, Natalie would have in her account, $53.83 than David

∠1≅∠2 by the alternate exterior angles theorem.

step-by-step explanation:

given, a ∥ b and ∠1 ≅ ∠3 .we have to prove that e ∥ f

we know that ∠1≅∠3 and that a || b because they are given. we see that by the alternate exterior angles theorem. therefore, ∠2≅∠3 by the transitive property. so, we can conclude that e || f by the converse alternate exterior angles theorem.

we have to fill the missing statement.

transitivity property states that if a = b and b = c, then a = c.

now, given ∠1≅∠3 and by transitivity property ∠2≅∠3 .

hence, to apply transitivity property one angle must be common which is not in result after applying this property which is ∠1.

the only options in which ∠1 is present are ∠1 and ∠2, ∠1 and ∠4

∠1 and ∠4 is not possible ∵ after applying transitivity we didn't get ∠4.

hence, the missing statement is ∠1≅∠2.

so, ∠1≅∠2 by the alternate exterior angles theorem.

c 1 hour

step-by-step explanation:

m = 2e

m = 2 so 2 = 2e

1 = e