Natalie has $5000 and decides to put her money in the bank in an account that has a 10% interest rate that is compounded continuously.
What type of exponential model is Natalie’s situation?
Write the model equation for Natalie’s situation
How much money will Natalie have after 2 years?
How much money will Natalie have after 10 years?

Part 1) Is a exponential growth function

Part 2)      or  

Part 3)

Part 4)  

Step-by-step explanation:

Part 1) What type of exponential model is Natalie’s situation?

What type of exponential model is Natalie’s situation?

we know that

The formula to calculate continuously compounded interest is equal to

where  

A is the Final Investment Value  

P is the Principal amount of money to be invested  

r is the rate of interest in decimal  

t is Number of Time Periods  

e is the mathematical constant number

we have  

substitute in the formula above

Applying property of exponents

therefore

Is a exponential growth function, because the base is greater than 1

Part 2) Write the model equation for Natalie’s situation

   or  

see Part 1)

Part 3) How much money will Natalie have after 2 years?

For t=2 years

substitute

Part 4) How much money will Natalie have after 10 years?

For t=10 years

substitute

the required function is .

step-by-step explanation:

from the given table it is noticed that the graph passing through (-3,7), (0,4), (3,1) and (8,-4).

it is a linear function because the value of y is decrease by one as the value of x increase by 1.

the slope of the function is

the slope of the function is -1 and the y-intercept is 4.

the slope intercept form is

where, m is slope and b is y-intercept.

therefore the required function is . the graph of this function is shown below.

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.