Peter added the following fractionsIs Peter correct?
2 answers:
You might be interested in
<u>Answer:</u>
B. He multiplied the dividend by 100 instead of 10.
<u>Step-by-step explanation:</u>
Chen had to divide by
. To make it easier to divide, he thought of multiplying both the dividend and the divisor by 10.
Chen multiplied the divisor by 10 but mistakenly multiplied the dividend by 100 instead of 10.
So his whole division problem was changed.
Therefore, the correct answer option is B. He multiplied the dividend by 100 instead of 10.
9514 1404 393
Answer:
-3 ≤ x ≤ 19/3
Step-by-step explanation:
This inequality can be resolved to a compound inequality:
-7 ≤ (3x -5)/2 ≤ 7
Multiply all parts by 2.
-14 ≤ 3x -5 ≤ 14
Add 5 to all parts.
-9 ≤ 3x ≤ 19
Divide all parts by 3.
-3 ≤ x ≤ 19/3
_____
<em>Additional comment</em>
If you subtract 7 from both sides of the given inequality, it becomes ...
|(3x -5)/2| -7 ≤ 0
Then you're looking for the values of x that bound the region where the graph is below the x-axis. Those are shown in the attachment. For graphing purposes, I find this comparison to zero works well.
__
For an algebraic solution, I like the compound inequality method shown above. That only works well when the inequality is of the form ...
|f(x)| < (some number) . . . . or ≤
If the inequality symbol points away from the absolute value expression, or if the (some number) expression involves the variable, then it is probably better to write the inequality in two parts with appropriate domain specifications:
|f(x)| > g(x) ⇒ f(x) > g(x) for f(x) > 0; or -f(x) > g(x) for f(x) < 0
Any solutions to these inequalities must respect their domains.
