All categories

4 years ago

3x+y=7 6x+4y=22 can somebody help me solve this problem?

1 answer:

swat324 years ago

5 0

Hey there!

$\boxed{x=1;y=4}$

$3x + y = 7 \\ \\ 
 6x + 4y = 22$

$y = -3x + 7 \\ \\ Plug \ this \ in \ for \ variable \ (y) \ in \ equation \ \\ \\ 

 6x + 4*(-3x+7) = 22 \\ \\ 
 -6x = -6 \\ \\ 6x=6 \ x+1 \\ \\ x=1 \ y=-3x+7 \\ \\ \boxed{y=-3(1)+7=4} \\ \\ \boxed{\boxed{x=1;y=4}}$

I hope this helps you!

You might be interested in

123556 cube root pls

Korvikt [17]

Answer: ❄︎ ✭ ❄︎

The cube root of 123556 is: ✩ ✶ ✲

49.807.... ★ ✮

It is irrational, which means it goes on forever. ✧ ☆

Step-by-step explanation: ✺ ✹

$*VirtuosoTeen*$ ✰ ✴︎

✴︎ ❃ ✴︎ ❈ ✴︎ ✩ ✦ ✣

4 0

3 years ago

One gallon of gasoline in buffalo, New York costs $2.29. In Toronto, Canada, one liter of gas costs $0.91. There are 3.8 liters

Solnce55 [7]

Answer:

The cost of one gallon of gas in Toronto, Canada is $3.458.

Solution:

Given, One gallon of gasoline in buffalo, New York costs $2.29.

In Toronto, Canada, one liter of gas costs $0.91.

There are 3.8 liters in one gallon.

We have to find how much does one gallon of gas cost in Toronto?

Now, cost of one gallon of gas in Toronto = cost of one litre of gas in Toronto x 3.8 liters for 1 gallon.

Cost of one gallon of gas = 0.91 x 3.8 = 3.458

Hence, the cost of one gallon of gas in Toronto, Canada is $3.458.

3 0

3 years ago

Which inequality is true use the number line to help

Nata [24]

Answer:

-3 1/2 > -4.5

Step-by-step explanation:

1.5 > 2 1/2 False

1/2 > 0.5 False

-2.5 > -1.5 False

-3 1/2 > -4.5 True

1.5 > 2 1/2

1/2 = 0.5

2 + 0.5 = 2.5

1.5 is not > 2.5

1.5 < 2.5

1/2 > 0.5

1/2 = 0.5

0.5 is not > 0.5

0.5 = 0.5

-2.5 > -1.5

Negative numbers are oposite of positive numbers when using inequalities. Just as 0 < 1, -1 < 0.

-2.5 is not > -1.5

-2.5 < -1.5

-3 1/2 > -4.5

1/2 = 0.5

3 + 0.5 = 3.5

-3.5 > -4.5

7 0

3 years ago

Read 2 more answers

Verify identity: (sec(x)-csc(x))/(sec(x)+csc(x))=(tan(x)-1)/(tan(x)+1)

Nikitich [7]

So hmmm let's do the left-hand-side first

$\bf \cfrac{sec(x)-csc(x)}{sec(x)+csc(x)}\implies \cfrac{\frac{1}{cos(x)}-\frac{1}{sin(x)}}{\frac{1}{cos(x)}+\frac{1}{sin(x)}}\implies 
\cfrac{\frac{sin(x)-cos(x)}{cos(x)sin(x)}}{\frac{sin(x)+cos(x)}{cos(x)sin(x)}}
\\\\\\
\cfrac{sin(x)-cos(x)}{cos(x)sin(x)}\cdot \cfrac{cos(x)sin(x)}{sin(x)+cos(x)}\implies \boxed{\cfrac{sin(x)-cos(x)}{sin(x)+cos(x)}}$

now, let's do the right-hand-side then

$\bf \cfrac{tan(x)-1}{tan(x)+1}\implies \cfrac{\frac{sin(x)}{cos(x)}-1}{\frac{sin(x)}{cos(x)}+1}\implies \cfrac{\frac{sin(x)-cos(x)}{cos(x)}}{\frac{sin(x)+cos(x)}{cos(x)}}
\\\\\\
\cfrac{sin(x)-cos(x)}{cos(x)}\cdot \cfrac{cos(x)}{sin(x)+cos(x)}\implies \boxed{\cfrac{sin(x)-cos(x)}{sin(x)+cos(x)}}$

7 0

3 years ago

George observes that for every increase of 1 in the value of x, there is a increase of 60 in the corresponding value of y. He cl

Brums [2.3K]

Hi there!

FACTS :

To see if multiple ratios are proportional, you can write them as fractions, reduce them, and compare them. If the reduced fractions are all the same, then you have proportionnal ratios. You can also write them as fractions and divide the numerator (top number) by its denominator (bottom number), and compare the decimal numbers the same way you would compare the fractions (I personnaly find this method easier because you don't need to simplify the fractions).

STEPS TO ANSWER:

x = 1 ; y = 90 → $\frac{1}{90} =$ 1 ÷ 90 = 0.01111111...

x = 2 ; y = 150 → $\frac{2}{150} =$ 2 ÷ 150 = 0.0133333...

x = 3 ; y = 210 → $\frac{3}{210} =$ 3 ÷ 210 = 0.01428571

x = 4 ; y = 270 → $\frac{4}{270} =$ 4 ÷ 270 = 0.0148148...

x = 5 ; y = 330 → $\frac{5}{330} =$ 5 ÷ 330 = 0.01515152

** You didn't really need to calculate them all because even the first two decimal numbers weren't equivalent, but I wanted to show you the whole process so I calculated them all.

⇒ If you compare all the decimals you got, you can easily see that they are not the same, which means that the ratios between the values of "x" and the values of "y" are not proportional. Therefore, George's reasoning wasn't good.

There you go! I really hope this helped, if there's anything just let me know! :)

5 0

3 years ago