All categories

3 years ago

What is an equation of the line through (-1,-4) and parallel to the line 3x+y=s

Mathematics

1 answer:

timofeeve [1]3 years ago

4 0

line: 3x + y = s

y = s - 3x

To two lines be parallel both angular coeficients need to be equal

In y = s - 3x our angular coeficient is -3

y = ax + b where a is angular and b is linear

Now we have the equation

(y - yo) = m.(x - xo)

(y - (-4)) = -3.(x - (-1))

y + 4 = -3.(x + 1)

y + 4 = -3x - 3

y = -3x - 3 - 4

y = -3x - 7 is parallel to y = -3x + s

You might be interested in

What algebraic expression is a product with a factor of 5

USPshnik [31]

Answer:

y=5x

Step-by-step explanation:

A product means multiplication, and you need to multiply x by 5 in order to make the product have a factor of 5.

4 0

2 years ago

If 1/3 = 2 , 2/3 = ?

Andrei [34K]

Answer:

2/3 = 1.5

Step-by-step explanation:

6 0

3 years ago

Read 2 more answers

a set v is given, together with definitions of addition and scalar multiplication. determine which properties of a vector space

agasfer [191]

The properties of a vector space are satisfied Properties 1,2, 5(a) and 5(c) are satisfied, the relaxation of the homes aren't legitimate are if $v = x ^ 2 1× v=1^ ×x ^ 2 = 1 #V$

Property three does now no longer follow: Suppose that Property three is legitimate, shall we name $v = a * x ^ 2 +bx +c$ the neuter of V. Since v is the neuter, then O have to be constant with the aid of using the neuted, consequently $0 = O + v = (O x ^ 2 + Ox + O) + (a × x ^ 2 + bx + c) = c × x ^ 2 + b ^ 2 + a$

= 0 If O is the neuter, then it ought to restore x², but $0+ x² = (0x²+0x+zero) + (x²+0x+zero) = 1.$ This is a contradiction due to the fact x² isn't 1. We finish that V doesnt have a neuter vector. This additionally method that belongings four would not observe either. A set with out 0 cant

have additive inverse

$Let r= v ×2x ^ 2 + v × 1x +v0 , w= w ×2x ^ 2 + w × 1x +w0 . We have that\\v+w= (vO + wO) ^ x^ 2 +(vl^ × wl)^ x+ ( v 2^ × w2)• w+v= (wO + vO) ^x^ 2 +(wl^ × vl)x+ ( w 2^ ×v2)$

Since the sum of actual numbers is commutative, we finish that v + w = w + v Therefore, belongings 5(a) is valid.

Property 5(b) isn't valid: we are able to introduce

a counter example. we could use z = 1 then $v = x ^ 2 w = x ^ 2 + 1\\(v + w) + z = (x ^ 2 + 2) + 1 = 3x ^ 2 + 1$

v + (w + z) = x ^ 2 + (2x ^ 2 + 1) = x ^ 2 + 3

Since 3x ^ 2 +1 ne x^ 2 +3. then the associativity rule doesnt hold.

$(1+2)^ * (x^ 2 +x)=3^ * (x ^ 2 + x) = 3x + 3\\1^ × (x^ 2 +x)+2^ × (x ^ 2 + x) = (x + 1) + (2x + 2) = 3x ^ 2 + x ( ne 3x + 3 )\\(1^ ×2)^ ×(x^ 2 +x)=2^ × (x ^ 2 + x) = 2x + 2\\1^ × (2^ × (x ^ 2 + x) )=1^ × (2x+2)=2x^ 2 +2x( ne2x+2)$

Property f doesnt observe because of the switch of variables. for instance, if v = x ^ 2 1 × v=1^ × x ^ 2 = 1 #V

Properties 1,2, 5(a) and 5(c) are satisfied, the relaxation of the homes arent legitimate.

Step-with the aid of using-step explanation:

Note that each sum and scalar multiplication entails in replacing the order from that most important coefficient with the impartial time period earlier than doing the same old sum/scalar multiplication.

Property three does now no longer follow: Suppose that Property three is legitimate, shall we name v = a × x ^ 2 +bx +c the neuter of V. Since v is the neuter, then O have to be constant with the aid of using the neuted, consequently $0 = O + v = (O × x ^ 2 + Ox + O) + (a × x ^ 2 + bx + c) = c × x ^ 2 + b ^ 2 + a$

= zero If O is the neuter, then it ought to restore x², but zero $+ x² = (0x²+0x+zero) + (x²+0x+zero) = 1.$ This is a contradiction due to the fact x² isn't 1. We finish that V doesnt have a neuter vector. This additionally method that belongings four would not observe either. A set with out 0 cant have additive inverse

Let $r= v × 2x ^ 2 + v × 1x +v0 , w= w2x ^ 2 + w × 1x +w0 . \\We have thatv+w= (vO + wO) ^ x^ 2 +(vl^ wl)^x+ ( v 2^ w2)w+v= (wO + vO) ^ x^ 2 +(wl^ vl)x+ ( w 2^v2)$

Since the sum of actual numbers is commutative, we finish that v + w = w + v Therefore, belongings 5(a) is valid.

Property 5(b) isn't valid: we are able to introduce

a counter example. we could use $z = 1 then v = x ^ 2 w = x ^ 2 + 1(v + w) + z = (x ^ 2 + 2) + 1 = 3x ^ 2 + 1v + (w + z) = x ^ 2 + (2x ^ 2 + 1) = x ^ 2 + 3\\Since 3x ^ 2 +1 ne x^ 2 +3.$ then the associativity rule doesnt hold.

Note that each expressions are same because of the distributive rule of actual numbers. Also, you could be aware that his assets holds due to the fact in each instances we 'switch variables twice.

$· (1+2)^ * (x^ 2 +x)=3^ * (x ^ 2 + x) = 3x + 31^ * (x^ 2 +x)+2^ * (x ^ 2 + x) = (x + 1) + (2x + 2) = 3x ^ 2 + x ( ne 3x + 3 )(1^ * 2)^ * (x^ 2 +x)=2^ * (x ^ 2 + x) = 2x + 21^ * (2^ * (x ^ 2 + x) )=1^ ×* (2x+2)=2x^ 2 +2x( ne2x+2)$