The answer is (-21, 13) for The second endpoint.
Let's start by calling the known endpoint L and the unknown K. We'll call the midpoint M. In order to find this, we must first note that to find a midpoint we need to take the average of the endpoints. To do this we add them together and then divide by 2. So, using that, we can write a formula and solve for each part of the k coordinates. We'll start with just x values.
(Kx + Lx)/2 = Mx
(Kx + 1)/2 = -10
Kx + 1 = -20
Kx = -21
And now we do the same thing for y values
(Ky + Ly)/2 = My
(Ky + 7)/2 = 10
Ky + 7 = 20
Ky = 13
This gives us the final point of (-21, 13)
![\begin{cases} 4x+3y=-8\\\\ -8x-6y=16 \end{cases}~\hspace{10em} \begin{array}{|c|ll} \cline{1-1} slope-intercept~form\\ \cline{1-1} \\ y=\underset{y-intercept}{\stackrel{slope\qquad }{\stackrel{\downarrow }{m}x+\underset{\uparrow }{b}}} \\\\ \cline{1-1} \end{array} \\\\[-0.35em] ~\dotfill](https://tex.z-dn.net/?f=%5Cbegin%7Bcases%7D%204x%2B3y%3D-8%5C%5C%5C%5C%20-8x-6y%3D16%20%5Cend%7Bcases%7D~%5Chspace%7B10em%7D%20%5Cbegin%7Barray%7D%7B%7Cc%7Cll%7D%20%5Ccline%7B1-1%7D%20slope-intercept~form%5C%5C%20%5Ccline%7B1-1%7D%20%5C%5C%20y%3D%5Cunderset%7By-intercept%7D%7B%5Cstackrel%7Bslope%5Cqquad%20%7D%7B%5Cstackrel%7B%5Cdownarrow%20%7D%7Bm%7Dx%2B%5Cunderset%7B%5Cuparrow%20%7D%7Bb%7D%7D%7D%20%5C%5C%5C%5C%20%5Ccline%7B1-1%7D%20%5Cend%7Barray%7D%20%5C%5C%5C%5C%5B-0.35em%5D%20~%5Cdotfill)
![4x+3y=-8\implies 3y=-4x-8\implies y=\cfrac{-4x-8}{3}\implies y=\stackrel{\stackrel{m}{\downarrow }}{-\cfrac{4}{3}} x-\cfrac{8}{3} \\\\[-0.35em] ~\dotfill\\\\ -8x-6y=16\implies -6y=8x+16\implies y=\cfrac{8x+16}{-6} \\\\\\ y=\cfrac{8}{-6}x+\cfrac{16}{-6}\implies y=\stackrel{\stackrel{m}{\downarrow }}{-\cfrac{4}{3}} x-\cfrac{8}{3}](https://tex.z-dn.net/?f=4x%2B3y%3D-8%5Cimplies%203y%3D-4x-8%5Cimplies%20y%3D%5Ccfrac%7B-4x-8%7D%7B3%7D%5Cimplies%20y%3D%5Cstackrel%7B%5Cstackrel%7Bm%7D%7B%5Cdownarrow%20%7D%7D%7B-%5Ccfrac%7B4%7D%7B3%7D%7D%20x-%5Ccfrac%7B8%7D%7B3%7D%20%5C%5C%5C%5C%5B-0.35em%5D%20~%5Cdotfill%5C%5C%5C%5C%20-8x-6y%3D16%5Cimplies%20-6y%3D8x%2B16%5Cimplies%20y%3D%5Ccfrac%7B8x%2B16%7D%7B-6%7D%20%5C%5C%5C%5C%5C%5C%20y%3D%5Ccfrac%7B8%7D%7B-6%7Dx%2B%5Ccfrac%7B16%7D%7B-6%7D%5Cimplies%20y%3D%5Cstackrel%7B%5Cstackrel%7Bm%7D%7B%5Cdownarrow%20%7D%7D%7B-%5Ccfrac%7B4%7D%7B3%7D%7D%20x-%5Ccfrac%7B8%7D%7B3%7D)
one simple way to tell if both equations do ever meet or have a solution is by checking their slope, notice in this case the slopes are the same for both, meaning the lines are parallel lines, however, notice both equations are really the same, namely the 2nd equation is really the 1st one in disguise.
since both equations are equal, their graph will be of one line pancaked on top of the other, and the solutions is where they meet, hell, they meet everywhere since one is on top of the other, so infinitely many solutions.
Answer:
Step-by-step explanation:
It would be 2.43ft cubed. You first have to multiply 6 x 9 to get 54 and then Do 54 x 4.5 to get 243 ft cubed. Next you have to put it in fraction form 243/100. After that you have to divide 243 by hundred( you can do this by moving the decimal place two places to the left) and you get the answer 2.43 ft cubed
Answer:
Step-by-step explanation:
So in this example we'll be using the difference of squares which essentially states that: 
or another way to think of it would be: 
. So in this example you'll notice both terms are perfect squares. in fact x^n is a perfect square as long as n is even. This is because if it's even it can be split into two groups evenly for example, in this case we have x^8. so the square root is x^4 because you can split this up into (x * x * x * x) * (x * x * x * x) = x^8. Two groups with equal value multiplying to get x^8, that's what the square root is. So using these we can rewrite the equation as:
Now in this case you'll notice the degree is still even (it's 4) and the 4 is also a perfect square, and it's a difference of squares in one of the factors, so it can further be rewritten:
So completely factored form is: 
I'm assuming that's considered completely factored but you can technically factor it further. While the identity difference of squares technically only applies to difference of squares, it can also be used on the sum of squares, but you need to use imaginary numbers. Because 
. and in this case a=x^2 and b=-4. So rewriting it as the difference of squares becomes: 
just something that might be useful in some cases.
