Solving a TI-83/84 Calculator Exam Question: 771 vs. 1,059

  • Thread starter Thread starter jfhorns7853
  • Start date Start date
  • Tags Tags
    Calculator Exam
Join the discussion
Ask a follow-up here, or get your own question answered by working scientists, mathematicians and engineers — people, not an autocomplete.
Real named experts · corrections over time · the nuance an AI answer skips
3 replies · 2K views
jfhorns7853
Messages
12
Reaction score
0
This is a question from a TI-83/84 calculator exam that I took on February 14th. (haha what a shocker a math nerd without a girlfriend.) Anyway, this is one of the few that I missed, and when I revisited it I noticed that I had actually misread the question at hand. Anyway, the problem is that the two ways that I have tried to solve the problem have given me vastly different answers.

1.
A family has met on September 1st to visit since 1961. At that time, there were 71 family members, and each year the family grew as a net result of marriages, divorces, adoptions, births, and deaths by an amount equal to the largest integer less that 6% of the total from the previous year. There were 39 family members who missed the 2008 meeting. How many attended the 2008 meeting?

2.
The first included programing the calculator which gave me an answer of 771 total family members. Umm, I guess I could post the programming lines? Ask if you do!

The second was a different take on the problem, in which I instead set it up like one would if trying to find compound interest. That gave me: 1,059 total family members.

1,059 = 71(1 + .06/1)^(1*47)

3.
I've already stated my answers above, but here they are again:
Calculator Program: 771 total family members.
Compound Interest: 1,059 total family members.
 
Physics news on Phys.org
I went about it the second way, too.

missbooty87

(oh, and math nerds are not only guys. they are girls, too. And I was without a boyfriend on feb 14 ha ha ha i think its a nerd thing)
 
haha Sorry to leave out the fairer side of the math nerds or really nerds in general! haha so yeah, The second way makes more sense I think.