Commission or salary: jill has a job offer. she is offered either $50 per day or £30 per day plus a commission of $3 for every plant she sells. how many plants does she need to sell to make the commission offer the best paying option?

7 plants

Step-by-step explanation:

Jill is offered either $50 per day or $30 per day plus a commission of $3 for every plant she sells.

Let she sells the number of  plants = p

30 + (3 × p) > 50

3p > 50 - 30

3p > 20

p > 20/3

p > 6.666 ≈ 7 plants

She need to sell 7 plants to make the commission offer the best paying option.

the multiples of 15 are 15, 30,45, 60, 75, 90, 105, 120, 135, 150, 165, 180, 195,   210, 225, 240, 255, 270, 285, 300, 315, 330, 345, 360, 375,   390, 405, 420, 435, 450, 465, 480, 495, 510, 525, 540, 555, 570, 585, 600, 615, 630, 645, 660, 675, 690, 705, 720, and 735.

the factors of 15 are 1, 3, 5, and 15.

hope that , fam!

-une, your fren : )

i think it's eleven too, don't woosh me here, but according to the "experts" it's 2.

the proof starts from the peano postulates, which define the natural

numbers n. n is the smallest set satisfying these postulates:

  p1.   1 is in n.

  p2.   if x is in n, then its "successor" x' is in n.

  p3.   there is no x such that x' = 1.

  p4.   if x isn't 1, then there is a y in n such that y' = x.

  p5.   if s is a subset of n, 1 is in s, and the implication

      (x in s => x' in s) holds, then s = n.

then you have to define addition recursively:

  def: let a and b be in n. if b = 1, then define a + b = a'

      (using p1 and p2). if b isn't 1, then let c' = b, with c in n

      (using p4), and define a + b = (a + c)'.

then you have to define 2:

  def:   2 = 1'

2 is in n by p1, p2, and the definition of 2.

theorem:   1 + 1 = 2

proof: use the first part of the definition of + with a = b = 1.

      then 1 + 1 = 1' = 2   q.e.d.

note: there is an alternate formulation of the peano postulates which

replaces 1 with 0 in p1, p3, p4, and p5. then you have to change the

definition of addition to this:

  def: let a and b be in n. if b = 0, then define a + b = a.

      if b isn't 0, then let c' = b, with c in n, and define

      a + b = (a + c)'.

you also have to define 1 = 0', and 2 = 1'. then the proof of the

theorem above is a little different:

proof: use the second part of the definition of + first:

      1 + 1 = (1 + 0)'

      now use the first part of the definition of + on the sum in

      parentheses:   1 + 1 = (1)' = 1' = 2   q.e.d.