There is so much controversy about this question on the internet (well not this question exactly but the idea of taking a reciprocal of a discontinuous function).
Some say you can if you make it clear that the point causing the trouble is excluded in some way. Others say that you cannot contemplate the idea. You are creating a meaningless situation with no definition. It really depends on what you have been told about division by 0. There are ways of getting around this, but you are not taking a calculus course and therefore you likely don't have the tools to deal with it. In any event, it does not look to me like you know about limits yet.
Your marker or teacher or tutor can go either way on this problem and be justified in marking you wrong no matter what you do. As instructed I will put what I think should be done in the comment section. And remember, I'm counting noses and going with the majority when I answer this. It's not anything I'm 100% certain of, but neither is anyone else.
Step-by-step explanation:
because we can also find out the value of x in second equation like this
3x=21
x=21/3
x=7
Answer:
18 ounces
Step-by-step explanation:
5 x 6= 30
3 x 6= 18
<h3>
Answer:</h3>
For each birdhouse built, the total cost increases by $3.50.
<h3>
Step-by-step explanation:</h3>
Let's try some of the answers and see if they work.
The "initial cost" will be the cost when 0 birdhouses are built.
... f(0) = 3.5·0 +24 = 24 . . . . . clearly, not $3.50
Then increasing the number of birdhouses by 1, the cost is ...
... f(1) = 3.5·1 +24 = 27.5 . . . . . the cost has gone up (not down) by $3.50
Clearly the total cost to build 1 birdhouse is not $3.50. (It is $27.50.)
___
Our exploration of the formula leads us to conclude ...
... For each birdhouse built, the total cost increases by $3.50.
