Example 1:
The pros of Orthographic is that they can show hidden details and all of the connecting parts, they can be annotated to display material and finishes. The pros of Isometric projection is that they dont need many views and it gives accuracy, cons are is created a unorginized apperance by the lack of foreshortening, I would choose Isometric projection because it shows the size of the figure.
Example 2:
Orthographic projection is a good option for showing lots of detail and small things. The limitation is that with all of that detail, they can become quite messy and hard to understand to someone new to them. However, that is one of the pros of Isometric projection. It gives easy detail and is just as good as an Orthographic. Personally, I find Isometric projections easier to interpret.
Answer:
When y = |x + h|, the graph is shifted (or translated) <u>to the left.</u>
When y = |x - h|, the graph is shifted (or translated) <u>to the right.</u>
Step-by-step explanation:
Part A:
The parent function of vertex graphs are y = |x|, and any transformations done to y = |x| are shown in this format (also known as vertex form): y = a|x - h| + k
(h , k) is the vertex of the graph.
So, for the first part, what y = |x + h| is saying is y = |x - (-h)|.
The -h is substituted for h, and negatives cancel out, resulting in x + h.
This translates to the left of the graph.
Part B:
For the second part, y = |x - h| looks just like the normal vertex form. In this one, we are just plugging in a positive value for h.
This translates to the right of the graph.
It would be 3/5 because if you simplify it you would bet 3/5
Answer:
{5π/6, 11π/6}
Step-by-step explanation:
Since you have memorized the trig values of common angles, you know tan(π/6) = 1/√3, so cot(π/6) = √3.
The solution to this equation is ...
cot(θ) = -√3
so θ = -π/6 or, in the domain of interest, 11π/6. There is a corresponding quadrant II angle, 5π/6.
When you divide these you get
15.25/244=0.0625
