Discover the best answers at Westonci.ca, where experts share their insights and knowledge with you. Get detailed answers to your questions from a community of experts dedicated to providing accurate information. Get quick and reliable solutions to your questions from a community of experienced experts on our platform.
Sagot :
To determine whether Ramesh is correct about [tex]\( 7^{-5} \)[/tex], let's break down the calculation and understand the true value of [tex]\( 7^{-5} \)[/tex].
We are given the information that as the exponent decreases, the value is divided by 7. This pattern aligns with the rules of exponents for negative powers of a number.
Firstly, let's determine the true value of [tex]\( 7^{-5} \)[/tex]:
[tex]\[ 7^{-5} = \frac{1}{7^5} \][/tex]
Let's calculate [tex]\( 7^5 \)[/tex]:
[tex]\[ 7^5 = 7 \times 7 \times 7 \times 7 \times 7 = 16807 \][/tex]
Thus,
[tex]\[ 7^{-5} = \frac{1}{16807} \][/tex]
The numerical value of [tex]\(\frac{1}{16807}\)[/tex] can be approximated and it is:
[tex]\[ 7^{-5} \approx 5.9499018266198606 \times 10^{-5} \][/tex]
Now let's evaluate each statement provided in the question:
1. Ramesh is correct because [tex]\(7^{-5}\)[/tex] is equivalent to [tex]\(-7 \cdot (-7) \cdot (-7) \cdot (-7) \cdot (-7)\)[/tex], which has the same value as [tex]\(-16,807\)[/tex].
This statement is incorrect for several reasons:
- [tex]\( 7^{-5} \)[/tex] represents the reciprocal of [tex]\( 7^5 \)[/tex], not a series of multiplications involving negative sevens.
- [tex]\(-7 \cdot (-7) \cdot (-7) \cdot (-7) \cdot (-7)\)[/tex] would actually result in [tex]\(7^5 = 16807 \)[/tex] because multiplying an odd number of negative numbers still results in a negative number but not the correct context for reciprocal values.
2. Ramesh is correct because as the exponents decrease, the previous value is divided by 7, so [tex]\( 7^{-5} = 1 \div 7 \div 7 + 7 + 7 + 7 = -16,807 \)[/tex].
This statement is incorrect:
- While it is true that decreasing the exponent divides the previous value by 7, the arithmetic shown here mixes division and addition inappropriately to arrive at -16807, which is incorrect.
3. Ramesh is not correct because [tex]\( 7^{-5} \)[/tex] is equivalent to [tex]\(\frac{1}{7^5}\)[/tex], which has the same value as [tex]\(\frac{1}{7^4} \div 7 = \frac{1}{7^3} = \frac{1}{343}\)[/tex].
This statement is also incorrect:
- The correct relationship should be [tex]\( 7^{-5} = \frac{1}{7^5} \neq \frac{1}{7^4} \div 7 \)[/tex].
4. Ramesh is not correct because as the exponents decrease, the previous value is divided by 7, so [tex]\( 7^{-5} = 1 + 7 + 7 + 7 + 7 + 7 = \frac{1}{16807} \)[/tex].
This statement is part correct but contains errors:
- The reasoning behind decreased exponents involving division by 7 is correct, but the addition part is incorrect.
- However, it accurately specifies the correct final result [tex]\( \frac{1}{16807} \)[/tex].
Given the assessed calculations, the accurate statement should focus on the definition of [tex]\( 7^{-5} \)[/tex] as the reciprocal of [tex]\( 7^5 \)[/tex]:
Ramesh is not correct because [tex]\(7^{-5}\)[/tex] is equivalent to [tex]\(\frac{1}{7^5}\)[/tex], which has a value of approximately [tex]\(5.9499018266198606 \times 10^{-5}\)[/tex], not [tex]\(-16,807\)[/tex].
We are given the information that as the exponent decreases, the value is divided by 7. This pattern aligns with the rules of exponents for negative powers of a number.
Firstly, let's determine the true value of [tex]\( 7^{-5} \)[/tex]:
[tex]\[ 7^{-5} = \frac{1}{7^5} \][/tex]
Let's calculate [tex]\( 7^5 \)[/tex]:
[tex]\[ 7^5 = 7 \times 7 \times 7 \times 7 \times 7 = 16807 \][/tex]
Thus,
[tex]\[ 7^{-5} = \frac{1}{16807} \][/tex]
The numerical value of [tex]\(\frac{1}{16807}\)[/tex] can be approximated and it is:
[tex]\[ 7^{-5} \approx 5.9499018266198606 \times 10^{-5} \][/tex]
Now let's evaluate each statement provided in the question:
1. Ramesh is correct because [tex]\(7^{-5}\)[/tex] is equivalent to [tex]\(-7 \cdot (-7) \cdot (-7) \cdot (-7) \cdot (-7)\)[/tex], which has the same value as [tex]\(-16,807\)[/tex].
This statement is incorrect for several reasons:
- [tex]\( 7^{-5} \)[/tex] represents the reciprocal of [tex]\( 7^5 \)[/tex], not a series of multiplications involving negative sevens.
- [tex]\(-7 \cdot (-7) \cdot (-7) \cdot (-7) \cdot (-7)\)[/tex] would actually result in [tex]\(7^5 = 16807 \)[/tex] because multiplying an odd number of negative numbers still results in a negative number but not the correct context for reciprocal values.
2. Ramesh is correct because as the exponents decrease, the previous value is divided by 7, so [tex]\( 7^{-5} = 1 \div 7 \div 7 + 7 + 7 + 7 = -16,807 \)[/tex].
This statement is incorrect:
- While it is true that decreasing the exponent divides the previous value by 7, the arithmetic shown here mixes division and addition inappropriately to arrive at -16807, which is incorrect.
3. Ramesh is not correct because [tex]\( 7^{-5} \)[/tex] is equivalent to [tex]\(\frac{1}{7^5}\)[/tex], which has the same value as [tex]\(\frac{1}{7^4} \div 7 = \frac{1}{7^3} = \frac{1}{343}\)[/tex].
This statement is also incorrect:
- The correct relationship should be [tex]\( 7^{-5} = \frac{1}{7^5} \neq \frac{1}{7^4} \div 7 \)[/tex].
4. Ramesh is not correct because as the exponents decrease, the previous value is divided by 7, so [tex]\( 7^{-5} = 1 + 7 + 7 + 7 + 7 + 7 = \frac{1}{16807} \)[/tex].
This statement is part correct but contains errors:
- The reasoning behind decreased exponents involving division by 7 is correct, but the addition part is incorrect.
- However, it accurately specifies the correct final result [tex]\( \frac{1}{16807} \)[/tex].
Given the assessed calculations, the accurate statement should focus on the definition of [tex]\( 7^{-5} \)[/tex] as the reciprocal of [tex]\( 7^5 \)[/tex]:
Ramesh is not correct because [tex]\(7^{-5}\)[/tex] is equivalent to [tex]\(\frac{1}{7^5}\)[/tex], which has a value of approximately [tex]\(5.9499018266198606 \times 10^{-5}\)[/tex], not [tex]\(-16,807\)[/tex].
We hope you found this helpful. Feel free to come back anytime for more accurate answers and updated information. We appreciate your time. Please come back anytime for the latest information and answers to your questions. Get the answers you need at Westonci.ca. Stay informed by returning for our latest expert advice.
