When reflection goes about y-axis, the x coordinate changes into its opposite.
(-4,5)---->(4,5)
(-2,2)----->(2,2)
We'll want to end this one with x ≥ another value.
So, subtract 5 from both sides.
x+5≥10
-5 -5
x≥5
So, x must be greater than or equal to 5.
5.100 x 10⁻³ = 5.100 x 0.001
= 0.005100 (shift the decimal point for 5 by 3 units left)
Alternatively, because 10⁻³ = 1/1000, therefore
5.100 x 10⁻³ = 5.1/1000
0.0051
---------------
1000 | 5.100
5000
-------------
1000
1000
This yields the same result.
Answer: b. 0.005100
Based on my experiences so far, the approach to geometry that I prefer is: Euclidean Geometry. This is because the problems are easy to visualize since they are restricted to two-dimensional planes.
<h3>Which approach is easier to extend beyond two dimensions?</h3>
The approach that is easier to extend beyond two dimensions is Euclidean Geometry. Again, this is because of how it deals with shapes and visualization of the same.
Take for instance a triangle; it is easy to go from a two-dimensional equilateral triangle to a square pyramid.
<h3> What are some situations in which one approach to geometry would prove more beneficial than the other?</h3>
Analytical geometry is a superior technique for discovering objects (points, curves, and planes) based on their qualities in some situations than Euclidean geometry is in others (for example, when employing topography or building charts).
Learn more about Euclidean Geometry at;
brainly.com/question/2251564
#SPJ1
