The point was to make you review your response - and find your "mistake".>Your answer (OP) was absolutely misguided (not even wrong!)
What's the point of writing like this? The only thing you achieved was making me feel bad
And the answer I've got now is x = 1,613t/(1-t/65). Is this right?
from your original post ...Can I integrate the following with respect to t:
dx/dt = (x(t) + 105)/65
x = (x(t) = 105)/65 * t