So I did answer everything correctly?
Can you please explain 6.(3)
Why is it $\therefore$p$\implies$r rather than p$\therefore$r <--this is what I meant
is this right ?6(1).
p$\implies$q,
$\lnot$q$\therefore\lnot$p,
Modus tollens
6(2).
p$\implies$q,
q$\implies$r,
q$\therefore$r,
Transitivity
6(3).
p$\implies$q,
q$\therefore$p.
Converse fallacy
7. I have no idea what I'm doing please explain.
-
check if right
check if right
Now, 2 seems to be the right answer for A yet when i made x=5 and subtracted new form form the old one I got a difference of ~$\frac{4}{9}$ (should be 0 obviously) I got A=2 B=$\frac{45}{21}$ C=2
How to calculate $\lim_{{x}\to{\infty}}(- e^{-x})$