Every member of A is in B and at least one member of B is not in A
At least one member of A is not in B
We are given:
\[ A = 36^n - 35^n - 1 = (36^n - 1^n) - 35^n \]
Let’s write it as:
\[ A = 36^n - 1^n - 35^n \]
We use the identity:
\[ a^n - b^n \text{ is divisible by } (a - b) \text{ for all positive integers } n \]
Therefore,
\[ 36^n - 1^n \text{ is divisible by } 36 - 1 = 35 \]
So, the expression \( A = (36^n - 1^n) - 35^n \) is divisible by 35 minus \( 35^n \). But since:
\[ 36^n - 1^n \equiv 0 \pmod{35} \Rightarrow A = 36^n - 1^n - 35^n \equiv -35^n \pmod{35} \]
Now note that \( 35^n \equiv 0 \pmod{35} \Rightarrow A \equiv 0 \pmod{35} \)
Thus, for any integer \( n \), the expression \( A \) is divisible by 35.
Let:
Every value of the expression \( A \) is divisible by 35, hence:
\[ A \subseteq B \]
But not all multiples of 35 (e.g., 35, 70, 105, ...) can be expressed as \( 36^n - 1^n - 35^n \), so:
\[ B \not\subseteq A \Rightarrow A \subset B \]
\[ \boxed{\text{Every member of A is in B, but not every member of B is in A}} \]
For any natural number $k$, let $a_k = 3^k$. The smallest natural number $m$ for which \[ (a_1)^1 \times (a_2)^2 \times \dots \times (a_{20})^{20} \;<\; a_{21} \times a_{22} \times \dots \times a_{20+m} \] is:
The given sentence is missing in the paragraph below. Decide where it best fits among the options 1, 2, 3, or 4 indicated in the paragraph.
Sentence: While taste is related to judgment, with thinkers at the time often writing, for example, about “judgments of taste” or using the two terms interchangeably, taste retains a vital link to pleasure, embodiment, and personal specificity that is too often elided in post-Kantian ideas about judgment—a link that Arendt herself was working to restore.
Paragraph: \(\underline{(1)}\) Denneny focused on taste rather than judgment in order to highlight what he believed was a crucial but neglected historical change. \(\underline{(2)}\) Over the course of the seventeenth century and early eighteenth century, across Western Europe, the word taste took on a new extension of meaning, no longer referring specifically to gustatory sensation and the delights of the palate but becoming, for a time, one of the central categories for aesthetic—and ethical—thinking. \(\underline{(3)}\) Tracing the history of taste in Spanish, French, and British aesthetic theory, as Denneny did, also provides a means to recover the compelling and relevant writing of a set of thinkers who have been largely neglected by professional philosophy. \(\underline{(4)}\)