Discover a world of knowledge at Westonci.ca, where experts and enthusiasts come together to answer your questions. Connect with a community of professionals ready to help you find accurate solutions to your questions quickly and efficiently. Connect with a community of professionals ready to provide precise solutions to your questions quickly and accurately.
Sagot :
Jayden and Alexa made mistakes in their calculations. Let's walk through their mistakes and provide the corrected solution step-by-step.
### Jayden's Approach
1. Jayden incorrectly simplified the combinations and treated the factorial calculations incorrectly. His attempt was:
[tex]\[\frac{6!}{2!(6-2)!} + \frac{6!}{3!(6-3)!} \neq \frac{7!}{3!(7-3)!}\][/tex]
Simplifying,
[tex]\[\frac{6!}{2! \cdot 4!} + \frac{6!}{3! \cdot 3!} \neq \frac{7!}{3! \cdot 4!}\][/tex]
2. Correct calculation of [tex]\({ }_6C_2\)[/tex] and [tex]\({ }_6C_3\)[/tex]:
[tex]\[ { }_6C_2 = \frac{6!}{2! \cdot 4!} = \frac{6 \cdot 5}{2 \cdot 1} = 15 \][/tex]
[tex]\[ { }_6C_3 = \frac{6!}{3! \cdot 3!} = \frac{6 \cdot 5 \cdot 4}{3 \cdot 2 \cdot 1} = 20 \][/tex]
3. Sum of the calculated combinations:
[tex]\[ { }_6C_2 + { }_6C_3 = 15 + 20 = 35 \][/tex]
4. Correct calculation of [tex]\({ }_7C_3\)[/tex]:
[tex]\[ { }_7C_3 = \frac{7!}{3! \cdot 4!} = \frac{7 \cdot 6 \cdot 5}{3 \cdot 2 \cdot 1} = 35 \][/tex]
Therefore, [tex]\({ }_6C_2 + { }_6C_3 = { }_7C_3\)[/tex] is indeed true as both sides simplify to 35.
### Alexa's Approach
1. Alexa's initial step was correct but her use of the least common denominator was convoluted. Here's the correction using combinations:
[tex]\[ { }_6C_2 = \frac{6!}{2! \cdot 4!} \][/tex]
[tex]\[ { }_6C_3 = \frac{6!}{3! \cdot 3!} \][/tex]
[tex]\(\Rightarrow\)[/tex]
[tex]\[ { }_6C_2 + { }_6C_3 = 15 + 20 \][/tex]
2. As before, the combined result is:
[tex]\[ 15 + 20 = 35 \][/tex]
3. Alexa’s final check:
[tex]\[ { }_7C_3 = \frac{7!}{3! \cdot 4!} \][/tex]
[tex]\(\Rightarrow\)[/tex]
[tex]\[ { }_7C_3 = 35 \][/tex]
So, once corrected, Alexa's result too shows [tex]\({ }_6C_2 + { }_6C_3 = { }_7C_3.\)[/tex]
### Conclusion
Both Jayden and Alexa made mistakes initially but when corrected, both paths show the correct result. The identity [tex]\({ }_6C_2 + { }_6C_3 = { }_7C_3\)[/tex] holds true since:
[tex]\[ 15 + 20 = 35,\][/tex]
and hence,
[tex]\[35 = 35.\][/tex]
Thus, Jayden and Alexa both arrive at the correct conclusion when their errors are corrected.
### Jayden's Approach
1. Jayden incorrectly simplified the combinations and treated the factorial calculations incorrectly. His attempt was:
[tex]\[\frac{6!}{2!(6-2)!} + \frac{6!}{3!(6-3)!} \neq \frac{7!}{3!(7-3)!}\][/tex]
Simplifying,
[tex]\[\frac{6!}{2! \cdot 4!} + \frac{6!}{3! \cdot 3!} \neq \frac{7!}{3! \cdot 4!}\][/tex]
2. Correct calculation of [tex]\({ }_6C_2\)[/tex] and [tex]\({ }_6C_3\)[/tex]:
[tex]\[ { }_6C_2 = \frac{6!}{2! \cdot 4!} = \frac{6 \cdot 5}{2 \cdot 1} = 15 \][/tex]
[tex]\[ { }_6C_3 = \frac{6!}{3! \cdot 3!} = \frac{6 \cdot 5 \cdot 4}{3 \cdot 2 \cdot 1} = 20 \][/tex]
3. Sum of the calculated combinations:
[tex]\[ { }_6C_2 + { }_6C_3 = 15 + 20 = 35 \][/tex]
4. Correct calculation of [tex]\({ }_7C_3\)[/tex]:
[tex]\[ { }_7C_3 = \frac{7!}{3! \cdot 4!} = \frac{7 \cdot 6 \cdot 5}{3 \cdot 2 \cdot 1} = 35 \][/tex]
Therefore, [tex]\({ }_6C_2 + { }_6C_3 = { }_7C_3\)[/tex] is indeed true as both sides simplify to 35.
### Alexa's Approach
1. Alexa's initial step was correct but her use of the least common denominator was convoluted. Here's the correction using combinations:
[tex]\[ { }_6C_2 = \frac{6!}{2! \cdot 4!} \][/tex]
[tex]\[ { }_6C_3 = \frac{6!}{3! \cdot 3!} \][/tex]
[tex]\(\Rightarrow\)[/tex]
[tex]\[ { }_6C_2 + { }_6C_3 = 15 + 20 \][/tex]
2. As before, the combined result is:
[tex]\[ 15 + 20 = 35 \][/tex]
3. Alexa’s final check:
[tex]\[ { }_7C_3 = \frac{7!}{3! \cdot 4!} \][/tex]
[tex]\(\Rightarrow\)[/tex]
[tex]\[ { }_7C_3 = 35 \][/tex]
So, once corrected, Alexa's result too shows [tex]\({ }_6C_2 + { }_6C_3 = { }_7C_3.\)[/tex]
### Conclusion
Both Jayden and Alexa made mistakes initially but when corrected, both paths show the correct result. The identity [tex]\({ }_6C_2 + { }_6C_3 = { }_7C_3\)[/tex] holds true since:
[tex]\[ 15 + 20 = 35,\][/tex]
and hence,
[tex]\[35 = 35.\][/tex]
Thus, Jayden and Alexa both arrive at the correct conclusion when their errors are corrected.
Thanks for stopping by. We are committed to providing the best answers for all your questions. See you again soon. We appreciate your visit. Our platform is always here to offer accurate and reliable answers. Return anytime. Find reliable answers at Westonci.ca. Visit us again for the latest updates and expert advice.