open query6

course mth151

Do I need to be turning in the assignment that is supposed to be getting me ready for the real assignment? Are those for a grade too or just the open query?

The Open qa is recommended but not required, as long as you're doing well with the Queries. If you're getting everything to your satisfaction, and end up performing well on tests, then just submitting the Query would be fine.

006. `Query 6

*********************************************

Question: `qQuery 1.1.4 first 3 children male; conclusion next male. Inductive or deductive?

YYYYYYYYYYYYYYYYYYYYYYYYYYYYYYYYYYYYYYYYYYY

Your solution: Inductive, it shows patterns

confidence rating #$&*:

^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^

.............................................

Given Solution:

`a** The argument is inductive, because it attempts to argue from a pattern. **

&&&&&&&&&&&&&&&&&&&&&&&&&&&&&&&&&&&&&&&&&&&&&

Self-critique (if necessary): OK

------------------------------------------------

Self-critique rating #$&*:3

*********************************************

Question: `qQuery 1.1.8 all men mortal, Socrates a man, therefore Socrates mortal.

YYYYYYYYYYYYYYYYYYYYYYYYYYYYYYYYYYYYYYYYYYY

Your solution: Deductive, it talks about something general then something specific

confidence rating #$&*:

^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^

.............................................

Given Solution:

`a** this argument is deductive--the conclusions follow inescapably from the premises.

'all men' is general; 'Socrates' is specific. This goes general to specific and is therefore deductive.

COMMON ERROR: because it is based on a fact, or concrete evidence.

Fact isn't the key; the key is logical inevitability. The argument could be 'all men are idiots, Socrates is an man, therefore Socrates is an idiot'. The argument is every bit as logical as before. The only test for correctness of an argument is that the conclusions follow from the premises. It's irrelevant to the logic whether the premises are in fact true. **

&&&&&&&&&&&&&&&&&&&&&&&&&&&&&&&&&&&&&&&&&&&&&

Self-critique (if necessary): OK

------------------------------------------------

Self-critique rating #$&*:

*********************************************

Question: `qQuery 1.1.20 1 / 3, 3 / 5, 5/7, 7/9, ... Probable next element.

YYYYYYYYYYYYYYYYYYYYYYYYYYYYYYYYYYYYYYYYYYY

Your solution: 9/11 because 1 to 3 then 3 to 5 and 5 to 7 is all going up by 2 and repeating the denominator in the numerator for the next number

confidence rating #$&*: 2

^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^

.............................................

Given Solution:

`a**The numbers 1, 3, 5, 7, 9 and 11 are odd numbers. We note that the numerators consist of the odd numbers, each in its turn. The denominator for any given fraction is the next odd number after the numerator.

Since the last member listed is 7/9, with numerator 7, the next member will have numerator 9; its denominator will be the next odd number 11, and the fraction will be 9/11.

There are other ways of seeing the pattern. We could see that we use every odd number in its turn, and that the numerator of one member is the denominator of the preceding member.

Alternatively we might simply note that the numerator and denominator of the next member are always 2 greater than the numerator and denominator of the present member. **

&&&&&&&&&&&&&&&&&&&&&&&&&&&&&&&&&&&&&&&&&&&&&

Self-critique (if necessary): OK

------------------------------------------------

Self-critique rating #$&*:2

*********************************************

Question: `qQuery 1.1.23 This problem wasn't assigned, but you should be able to make a good attempt: 1, 8, 27, 64, ... What is the probable next element?

YYYYYYYYYYYYYYYYYYYYYYYYYYYYYYYYYYYYYYYYYYY

Your solution: 125 because it is 5^3

confidence rating #$&*:

^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^

.............................................

Given Solution:

`a** This is the sequence of cubes. 1^3 = 1, 2^3 = 8, 3^3 = 27, 4^3 = 64, 5^3 = 125.

The next element is 6^3 = 216.

Successive differences also work:

1 8 27 64 125 .. 216

7 19 37 61 .. 91

12 18 24 .. 30

6 6 .. 6 **

&&&&&&&&&&&&&&&&&&&&&&&&&&&&&&&&&&&&&&&&&&&&&

Self-critique (if necessary): OK

------------------------------------------------

Self-critique rating #$&*: 2

*********************************************

Question: `qQuery 1.1.36 11 * 11 = 121, 111 * 111 = 12321 1111 * 1111 = 1234321; next equation, verify.

YYYYYYYYYYYYYYYYYYYYYYYYYYYYYYYYYYYYYYYYYYY

Your solution: 11111*11111 = 123454321

confidence rating #$&*:

^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^

.............................................

Given Solution:

`a** We easily verify that 11111*11111=123,454,321 **

&&&&&&&&&&&&&&&&&&&&&&&&&&&&&&&&&&&&&&&&&&&&&

Self-critique (if necessary): OK

------------------------------------------------

Self-critique rating #$&*:3

*********************************************

Question: `qDo you think this sequence would continue in this manner forever? Why or why not?

YYYYYYYYYYYYYYYYYYYYYYYYYYYYYYYYYYYYYYYYYYY

Your solution: no because eventually it would become messed up when there are 10 or 11 or 12 ones being multiplied

confidence rating #$&*: 2

^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^

.............................................

Given Solution:

`a** You could think forward to the next few products: What happens after you get 12345678987654321? Is there any reason to expect that the sequence could continue in the same manner?

The middle three digits in this example are 8, 9 and 8. The logical next step would have 9, 10, 9, but now you would have 9109 in the middle and the symmetry of the number would be destroyed. There is every reason to expect that the pattern would also be destroyed. **

&&&&&&&&&&&&&&&&&&&&&&&&&&&&&&&&&&&&&&&&&&&&&

Self-critique (if necessary): OK

------------------------------------------------

Self-critique rating #$&*:2

*********************************************

Question: `qQuery 1.1.46 1 + 2 + 3 + ... + 2000 by Gauss' method

YYYYYYYYYYYYYYYYYYYYYYYYYYYYYYYYYYYYYYYYYYY

Your solution: The method is adding 1 to 2000 then 2 to 1999 all the pairs equal up to 2001

confidence rating #$&*:

^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^

.............................................

Given Solution:

`a** Pair up the first and last, second and second to last, etc.. You'll thus pair up 1 and 2000, 2 and 1999, 3 and 1998, etc..

Each pair of numbers totals 2001.

Since there are 2000 numbers there are 1000 pairs. So the sum is 2001 * 1000 = 2,001,000 **

&&&&&&&&&&&&&&&&&&&&&&&&&&&&&&&&&&&&&&&&&&&&&

Self-critique (if necessary): I didn’t realize I needed to multiply the sum by the number of pairs

------------------------------------------------

Self-critique rating #$&*: 2

*********************************************

Question: `qQuery 1.1.57 142857 * 1, 2, 3, 4, 5, 6. What happens with 7? Give your solution to the problem as stated in the text.

YYYYYYYYYYYYYYYYYYYYYYYYYYYYYYYYYYYYYYYYYYY

Your solution: 7 breaks the pattern

confidence rating #$&*:

^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^

.............................................

Given Solution:

`a** Multiplying we get

142857*1=142857

142857*2= 285714

142857*3= 428571

142857*4=571428

142857*5= 714285

142857*6=857142.

Each of these results contains the same set of digits {1, 2, 4, 5, 7, 8} as the number 1428785. The digits just occur in different order in each product.

We might expect that this pattern continues if we multiply by 7, but 142875*7=999999, which breaks the pattern. **

&&&&&&&&&&&&&&&&&&&&&&&&&&&&&&&&&&&&&&&&&&&&&

Self-critique (if necessary): OK

------------------------------------------------

Self-critique rating #$&*:2

*********************************************

Question: `qWhat does this problem show you about the nature of inductive reasoning?

YYYYYYYYYYYYYYYYYYYYYYYYYYYYYYYYYYYYYYYYYYY

Your solution: The pattern will continue on through 7

confidence rating #$&*:

^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^

.............................................

Given Solution:

`a** Inductive reasoning would have led us to expect that the pattern continues for multiplication by 7.

Inductive reasoning is often correct it is not reliable. Apparent patterns can be broken. **

"

Very good. See my note in answer to your question at the beginning.