Ask your own question, for FREE!
Mathematics 7 Online
OpenStudy (anonymous):

Which of the following inequalities matches the graph?

OpenStudy (anonymous):

OpenStudy (whpalmer4):

Can you determine the equation of the line that separates the two regions?

OpenStudy (anonymous):

well it passes through 2 and -6

OpenStudy (whpalmer4):

That's a start. What the slope be?

OpenStudy (anonymous):

If it passes 2 when x = 2, y should equal 0 and that is not the case of any of the listed inequalities..

OpenStudy (whpalmer4):

It actually goes close to, but not through, 2 and -6. We'll get the right slope, however...

OpenStudy (anonymous):

so is it D?

OpenStudy (whpalmer4):

Come on, I'm showing you how to systematically work these problems, including the cases where you don't have a menu of answers to choose from.

OpenStudy (anonymous):

im open to learn im not just about getting the answers

OpenStudy (whpalmer4):

So, the slope of the line is going to be what? It looks (to you) like it goes through (0,-6) and (2,0). It doesn't, but those numbers will give us the right slope anyhow. What is the slope of a line that passes through those two points?

OpenStudy (whpalmer4):

Going from (0,-6) to (2,0), we go 2 units to the right and 6 units up, so our slope is 6/2 = 3. Agreed?

OpenStudy (anonymous):

i agree with that

OpenStudy (whpalmer4):

If you prefer the more formal description: \[(x_1,y_1) = (0,-6),\,(x_2,y_2) = (2,0)\]\[m = \frac{y_2-y_1}{x_2-x_1} = \frac{0-(-6)}{2-0} = \frac{6}{2} = 3\] So our line dividing the two regions is of the form \[y = 3x + b\] I think if you look more closely at the admittedly fuzzy graph, you'll see that the line actually passes through (0,-5).

OpenStudy (whpalmer4):

But in any case, we have an inequality with a separating line that is dashed. Do you recall when we use solid lines and when we use dashed lines for the boundary in an inequality?

OpenStudy (anonymous):

Solid lines are part of the solution set. Dotted or dashed lines are borders of the solution set but are not part of the solution set.

OpenStudy (whpalmer4):

Okay. We have a dashed line, so the boundary or border is not part of the solution set. Does that mean we use \(<>\) or \(\le\ge\) for our inequality?

OpenStudy (anonymous):

<>

OpenStudy (whpalmer4):

We use a \(<\) or \(>\) here. Dashed line means no equals in the inequality symbol. Next, we need to figure out which way the inequality points. To do this, pick a point on the graph that you can easily determine whether it satisfies the inequality. (0,0) is a good choice here. (0,0) is in the shaded region, so it satisfies the inequality. At any given point of x, the shaded region is where y > 3x + the y intercept of that line. Looks like the line passes through (0,-5) so the y-intercept is -5. Our line is y = 3x-5, and our inequality is y > 3x-5 because 0 > 3(0)-5. That is not one of our answer choices, so D is our answer.

OpenStudy (anonymous):

Thank you so much! i understand a little better now

OpenStudy (whpalmer4):

Not my best description, I'm afraid — a little too much blood in my coffee stream this morning :-)

OpenStudy (whpalmer4):

But the general outline is okay: 1) find the equation of the line that makes up the border between the regions 2) convert it to an inequality of the right type by evaluating a convenient test point and choosing the right inequality symbol 3) whatever else is needed to finish the problem at hand

OpenStudy (anonymous):

OpenStudy (whpalmer4):

Okay, this one has a bit more clearly visible x and y intercepts! What are they?

OpenStudy (anonymous):

it looks like -2 and 3

OpenStudy (whpalmer4):

yes, (-2,0) and (0,3). What is the slope of the line through those points?

OpenStudy (anonymous):

y = 1.5x + 3

OpenStudy (whpalmer4):

Yes. And do we have a solid or dashed border this time?

OpenStudy (anonymous):

looks like a solid

OpenStudy (whpalmer4):

Agreed. So what is our finished inequality?

OpenStudy (anonymous):

i dont know :(

OpenStudy (whpalmer4):

Let's test a point again. (0,0) is in the shaded region, and we have two choices: \[y \le 1.5x + 3\]\[y \ge 1.5x+3\]Agreed so far?

OpenStudy (anonymous):

yes agreed

OpenStudy (whpalmer4):

Okay, which of those two equations is true when x = 0 and y = 0?

OpenStudy (anonymous):

the second one

OpenStudy (whpalmer4):

Are you sure? \[0 \ge 1.5(0) + 3\]\[0\ge3\]???

OpenStudy (anonymous):

ok lol the first one

OpenStudy (whpalmer4):

Yes, the first one is correct. Now, because you converted a fraction to a decimal, your work is complicated by the fact that your equation doesn't look identical. Usually better to keep fractions as fractions until you need decimal numbers, in my experience. \[y \ge \frac{3}{2}x+3\]is the equivalent of our inequality.

OpenStudy (anonymous):

OpenStudy (whpalmer4):

what's the equation of the border?

OpenStudy (anonymous):

y = 0x + 0 ?

OpenStudy (whpalmer4):

\[y = 0x+0 \]is the same as \[y = 0\]which is a horizontal line that sits on top of the x-axis. Is that the border here?

OpenStudy (whpalmer4):

Isn't your border a line consisting of points with the same x value, but different y values?

OpenStudy (anonymous):

yes

OpenStudy (whpalmer4):

So, isn't that going to look like \(x = k\) for \(k\) being some constant?

OpenStudy (whpalmer4):

y gets to be any number you choose, so long as \(x = k\). That's a vertical line at \(x = k\).

OpenStudy (whpalmer4):

It has an undefined slope (and is not a function) because there are multiple points with the same x value. If you tried to compute the slope, you'd have a division by 0.

OpenStudy (anonymous):

so it looks like its b

OpenStudy (whpalmer4):

No :-( The equation of the dividing line is x=2, is it not?

Can't find your answer? Make a FREE account and ask your own questions, OR help others and earn volunteer hours!

Join our real-time social learning platform and learn together with your friends!
Can't find your answer? Make a FREE account and ask your own questions, OR help others and earn volunteer hours!

Join our real-time social learning platform and learn together with your friends!