Jackson invested $750 into a savings bond that earned 3% interest each month. At the same time, he also began saving money in a savings account. The value of the savings account is represented by f(x) = 1,000 + 25x, where x represents the number of months since the account was opened. At the end of how many months did the value of the savings bond first begin to exceed the value of the savings account?

imma say 16%. sorry if its wrong. i'm doing the same stuff right now

step-by-step explanation:

m∠a is 90°

m∠b is 40°

step-by-step explanation:

and 90% of people marry there 7th grade love. since u have read this, u will be told good news 2night. if u don't pass this on nine comments ur worst week starts now this isn't fake. apparently if u copy and paste this on ten comments in the next ten minutes you will have the best day of ur life tomorrow. you will either get kissed or asked out in the next 53 minutes someone will say i love u

read more on -

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.