I’m need this worked out step by step by tonight
1 answer:
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.
You might be interested in
The given statement is proved by side-angle-side (SAS) theorem.
Yes, if two sides and the included angle of one triangle are congruent to the corresponding parts of another triangle the triangles are congruent.
The statement is proved by SAS theorem
<u>Side-Angle-Side (SAS) theorem: </u>
The triangles are congruent if two sides and the included angle of one triangle are equivalent to two sides and the included angle of another triangle.
Hence, The given statement is proved by side-angle-side (SAS) theorem.
To read more about Angles
#SPJ4
