Homework Help is Here – Start Your Trial Now!
Math
Advanced Math
9. Needing a break from studying, you take a walk to the Pogonip koi pond, whereupon a wild-eyed stranger pops out from behind a redwood tree and directs the following polemic in your general direction: "The lies those so-called teachers at that university promulgate, let me tell you. I know the truth that they don't want you to know. As plain as day, " = 0 for all n ≥0. It's an easy induction proof, see?" He hands you a leaflet, where you see the proof that they don't want you to see: We proceed by strong induction on n. Base case: n = 0. We have 10: Induction step: Assume that d1 = = = 0. dx dxk dx = 0 for all kn. Then, by the product rule, nd dx da 1x+1 = 1/1(x²x²) = x²±²x² + x 11 x² d = x.0+x¹.0 0. dx This completes the induction. That derivative rule doesn't seem like the one you learned, but there's nothing obviously wrong with the proof. Is he right, are the math professors propping up the interests of Big Calculus? Or should he have paid better attention in CSE 16? What's going on?

9. Needing a break from studying, you take a walk to the Pogonip koi pond, whereupon a wild-eyed stranger pops out from behind a redwood tree and directs the following polemic in your general direction: "The lies those so-called teachers at that university promulgate, let me tell you. I know the truth that they don't want you to know. As plain as day, " = 0 for all n ≥0. It's an easy induction proof, see?" He hands you a leaflet, where you see the proof that they don't want you to see: We proceed by strong induction on n. Base case: n = 0. We have 10: Induction step: Assume that d1 = = = 0. dx dxk dx = 0 for all kn. Then, by the product rule, nd dx da 1x+1 = 1/1(x²x²) = x²±²x² + x 11 x² d = x.0+x¹.0 0. dx This completes the induction. That derivative rule doesn't seem like the one you learned, but there's nothing obviously wrong with the proof. Is he right, are the math professors propping up the interests of Big Calculus? Or should he have paid better attention in CSE 16? What's going on?

Algebra & Trigonometry with Analytic Geometry
Algebra & Trigonometry with Analytic Geometry
13th Edition
ISBN:9781133382119
Author:Swokowski
Publisher:Swokowski
Chapter1: Fundamental Concepts Of Algebra
Section1.1: Real Numbers
Problem 30E
See similar textbooks
icon
Related questions
Question
9. Needing a break from studying, you take a walk to the Pogonip koi pond, whereupon a wild-eyed stranger pops out from behind a redwood tree and directs the following polemic in your general direction: "The lies those so-called teachers at that university promulgate, let me tell you. I know the truth that they don't want you to know. As plain as day, " = 0 for all n ≥0. It's an easy induction proof, see?" He hands you a leaflet, where you see the proof that they don't want you to see: We proceed by strong induction on n. Base case: n = 0. We have 10: Induction step: Assume that d1 = = = 0. dx dxk dx = 0 for all kn. Then, by the product rule, nd dx da 1x+1 = 1/1(x²x²) = x²±²x² + x 11 x² d = x.0+x¹.0 0. dx This completes the induction. That derivative rule doesn't seem like the one you learned, but there's nothing obviously wrong with the proof. Is he right, are the math professors propping up the interests of Big Calculus? Or should he have paid better attention in CSE 16? What's going on?
Transcribed Image Text:9. Needing a break from studying, you take a walk to the Pogonip koi pond, whereupon a wild-eyed stranger pops out from behind a redwood tree and directs the following polemic in your general direction: "The lies those so-called teachers at that university promulgate, let me tell you. I know the truth that they don't want you to know. As plain as day, " = 0 for all n ≥0. It's an easy induction proof, see?" He hands you a leaflet, where you see the proof that they don't want you to see: We proceed by strong induction on n. Base case: n = 0. We have 10: Induction step: Assume that d1 = = = 0. dx dxk dx = 0 for all kn. Then, by the product rule, nd dx da 1x+1 = 1/1(x²x²) = x²±²x² + x 11 x² d = x.0+x¹.0 0. dx This completes the induction. That derivative rule doesn't seem like the one you learned, but there's nothing obviously wrong with the proof. Is he right, are the math professors propping up the interests of Big Calculus? Or should he have paid better attention in CSE 16? What's going on?
Expert Solution
steps

Step by step

Solved in 2 steps with 2 images

SEE SOLUTIONCheck out a sample Q&A here
Blurred answer
Recommended textbooks for you
Algebra & Trigonometry with Analytic Geometry
Algebra & Trigonometry with Analytic Geometry
Algebra
ISBN:
9781133382119
Author:
Swokowski
Publisher:
Cengage
College Algebra (MindTap Course List)
College Algebra (MindTap Course List)
Algebra
ISBN:
9781305652231
Author:
R. David Gustafson, Jeff Hughes
Publisher:
Cengage Learning
Elementary Geometry For College Students, 7e
Elementary Geometry For College Students, 7e
Geometry
ISBN:
9781337614085
Author:
Alexander, Daniel C.; Koeberlein, Geralyn M.
Publisher:
Cengage,
Algebra: Structure And Method, Book 1
Algebra: Structure And Method, Book 1
Algebra
ISBN:
9780395977224
Author:
Richard G. Brown, Mary P. Dolciani, Robert H. Sorgenfrey, William L. Cole
Publisher:
McDougal Littell
Holt Mcdougal Larson Pre-algebra: Student Edition…
Holt Mcdougal Larson Pre-algebra: Student Edition…
Algebra
ISBN:
9780547587776
Author:
HOLT MCDOUGAL
Publisher:
HOLT MCDOUGAL
College Algebra
College Algebra
Algebra
ISBN:
9781337282291
Author:
Ron Larson
Publisher:
Cengage Learning
SEE MORE TEXTBOOKS