1. Maura recorded the following after asking several students what their favorite snack was. 8 chose popcorn. 5 chose pretzels. 2 chose M&M's. O chose Twizzlers. 3 chose Kit-Kat.
On separate paper, make a dot plot using the above data. Place the snacks in the same order
as listed above (popcorn, pretzels, M&M's, Twizzlers, Kit-Kat).
Answer the following based on the dot plot you created:
1. Where and what is the center?
2. Are there any gaps? If so, where is a gap?
3. Where and what is the peak?
4. What is the spread? *

an

y = 6x -3y -12

y +3y +12 = 6x

=> . x = { 2y / 3 +2 } this is equation of line in terms of x

=> . if line meets the x-axis the co-ordinates of meeting point would be ( x , 0 )

=> . x = 2 ( 0 ) / 3 + 2

=> . x = 2

so, the point is ( 2 , 0 )

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.