Posted on 08/02/2019 1:20:35 PM PDT by bitt
You might want to re-read what I wrote, we appear to be in agreement.
I wrote IF the answer is 16, and worked backward to solve for x which comes out to .125, which it is clearly not.
If setting the equation to 1, and solving for x, it solves as 2, which is the number originally used.
As you say, simple algebra.
It's all good.
I sure hope we still have something to save when Barr decides to give us a hand.
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.