1/4 to 1/2 Find the percent of change. Round to the nearest tenth of a percent if necessary.

what graph

step-by-step explanation:

whole numbers.

step-by-step explanation:

we are given the average monthly rainfall (in millimeters) model r(m) for the years 1900-2009 as a function of the month number m.

as we can see m is taken for the number of months for years 1900-2009.

we know that number of months can't be a negative number or decimal number or a fraction.

so, the number of months could be only positive whole numbers.

therefore, whole numbers is more appropriate for the domain of r.

really really sorry if i'm

-12 -5(x + 4) = 3x

-12 - 5x - 20 = 3x

-12 - 20 - 5x = 3x

-32 - 5x = 3x

    + 5x   + 5x

-32 = 8x

8         8

- 4= x

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.