Help cuz imma give 60 points for this According to the article, the pancake map is better than 2D maps made in the past. Which paragraph BEST supports this idea?
Group of answer choices

) Creating accurate 2D maps has troubled map makers for centuries. To help determine the various problems flat maps face, Gott worked with David Goldberg, a professor of physics at Drexel University in Philadelphia. In 2007, they published a system that rates existing flat maps.

Their system scored 2D maps on their deformations, or distortions. It scored six types of distortions: local shapes, areas, distances, flexion (bending, or distortions of curves), skewness (lopsidedness), and boundary cuts (gaps in landmasses or water, like splitting the Pacific Ocean). Maps that received lower scores were more accurate. A globe, which is spherical like the Earth, would earn perfect scores of zero.

Flat maps are good at representing one thing but not others. Take the world map most people are familiar with — the Mercator projection. This map is good at representing local shapes, it distorts surface areas near the North and South Poles, so these regions are often chopped off.

) The pancake map also has smaller distance errors than any other 2D flat map. For instance, its layout means distances cannot be more or less than 22.2 percent of what they are in reality, Gott said. In comparison, the Mercator and Winkel Tripel projections have remarkably high distance errors near the poles and at the left and right edges of the map.

c

step-by-step explanation: easy math

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.