Doua cămile au 4 cocoase . Folosind legatura dintre inmultire si impartire, afla cate cocoase au 3 camile, respectiv 7 camile

the largest number of the four options is 1.8 x 10-2

you have it in scientific notation.

1.80 x 10-6   = 0.00000180

1.80 x 10-4   = 0.000180 (bigger, or "less small", than the former one)

so

1.8 x 10-2       = 0.0180. as you see. the "less small", or the biggest one of them all.

as you have negative exponent, it means you are dividing 1.8 by 100 (i.e. moving the dot towards left, two times).

if you had positive exponent for the scientific notation, power of tenths, you would be multiplying times 100 (moving the dot towards right) as below:

1.8 x (10)2 = 180

so. if you have negative exponent in scientific notation, move the dot toward left. if it is positive, toward right as many times the exponent tells you.

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.

for future students the answer is b

hope i

-lavira: )