First we'll substitute with
Then we can separate this.
Then we'll solve this.
Then we'll plug in to find the extraneous solutions (if any)
Melissa believes the following graph shows direct variation. What is Melissa’s error?
2 answers:
Answer:
Option C.
Step-by-step explanation:
Melissa believes the following graph shows direct variation.
We need to find Melissa’s error.
If a variable y directly proportional to x, the
It can be written as
where, k is constant of proportionality.
It is a linear function with slope k and it passes through the origin.
From the given graph it is clear that the function is a straight line, it means the graph is a linear function and the rate change is constant.
But, it does not pass through the origin. So, the given graph does not represent the direct variation.
Therefore, the correct option is C.
You might be interested in
Answer:
x ∈ {-5, -1}
Step-by-step explanation:
Here's the solution using the quadratic formula:
The real zeros are -5 and -1.
_____
There are many ways to check your answer. One of them is to look at the given quadratic, which has no changes of sign in its coefficients. (They are all positive.) That means there can be no positive real roots, so already you know that x=0.5 won't work.
Also, the constant in the quadratic is the product of the roots, For your roots, their product is -7/4, so even multiplying by 4 (the leading coefficient in the given quadratic), you don't get anything like 20.
