Find the x-and y-intercepts of the graph of the equation algebraically.

$3y+2.5x-3.4=0$

Daniaal Sanchez
2020-11-08
Answered

Find the x-and y-intercepts of the graph of the equation algebraically.

$3y+2.5x-3.4=0$

You can still ask an expert for help

Leonard Stokes

Answered 2020-11-09
Author has **98** answers

Calculation:

Consider, the equation,$3y+2.5x\u20143.4=0$ ,

To compute x-intercept, put$y=0$ ,

$3\cdot 0+2.5x-3.4=0$

$2.5x-3.4+3.4=0+3.4$

$\frac{2.5}{2.5}x=\frac{3.4}{2.5}$

$x=1.36$

So, the x-intercept is (1.36, 0).

To compute y -intercept, put$x=0$ ,

$3y+2.5\times 0-3.4=0$

$\frac{3y}{3}=\frac{3.4}{3}$

$y=\frac{3.4}{3}$

$y=1.13$

So, the y -intercept is (0, 1.13).

Hence, the x and y-intercepts of$3y+2.5x-3.4=0$ are (1.36,0) and (0,1.13), respectively.

Consider, the equation,

To compute x-intercept, put

So, the x-intercept is (1.36, 0).

To compute y -intercept, put

So, the y -intercept is (0, 1.13).

Hence, the x and y-intercepts of

Jeffrey Jordon

Answered 2021-11-04
Author has **2581** answers

Answer is given below (on video)

asked 2021-01-08

Level of measurement

Number of students enrolled in each section of college Algebra at The Ohio State University.

Number of students enrolled in each section of college Algebra at The Ohio State University.

asked 2022-05-11

We can do row operations without changing det(A)'

But let's say I have an arbitrary upper triangular matrix U

$U=\left[\begin{array}{ccc}a& a& a\\ 0& b& b\\ 0& 0& c\end{array}\right]$

And I perform the following row operations on U to bring it to U′

$\frac{1}{a}{R}_{1}\to {R}_{1}$

$\frac{1}{b}{R}_{2}\to {R}_{2}$

$\frac{1}{c}{R}_{3}\to {R}_{3}$

Then U; is:

${U}^{\prime}=\left[\begin{array}{ccc}1& 1& 1\\ 0& 1& 1\\ 0& 0& 1\end{array}\right]$

But now det(U)=abc and det(U′)=1, thus

$det(U)\ne det({U}^{\prime})$

All I've done is perform row operations on U to bring it to U′, but by performing those row operations, their determinants lose equality. How can that be possible?

So how is this seeming contradiction is resolved. I'm assuming that I must have some misconception either on row operations or on determinants.

Furthermore on a deeper level, what geometric interpretation/meaning does scaling the rows as I've done bringing U to U′, have on the determinant? Since the determinants of U and U′ are obviously no longer equal, geometrically what is this scaling doing to the determinant?

But let's say I have an arbitrary upper triangular matrix U

$U=\left[\begin{array}{ccc}a& a& a\\ 0& b& b\\ 0& 0& c\end{array}\right]$

And I perform the following row operations on U to bring it to U′

$\frac{1}{a}{R}_{1}\to {R}_{1}$

$\frac{1}{b}{R}_{2}\to {R}_{2}$

$\frac{1}{c}{R}_{3}\to {R}_{3}$

Then U; is:

${U}^{\prime}=\left[\begin{array}{ccc}1& 1& 1\\ 0& 1& 1\\ 0& 0& 1\end{array}\right]$

But now det(U)=abc and det(U′)=1, thus

$det(U)\ne det({U}^{\prime})$

All I've done is perform row operations on U to bring it to U′, but by performing those row operations, their determinants lose equality. How can that be possible?

So how is this seeming contradiction is resolved. I'm assuming that I must have some misconception either on row operations or on determinants.

Furthermore on a deeper level, what geometric interpretation/meaning does scaling the rows as I've done bringing U to U′, have on the determinant? Since the determinants of U and U′ are obviously no longer equal, geometrically what is this scaling doing to the determinant?

asked 2020-12-15

Twenty-six students in a college algebra class took a final exam on which the passing score was 70. The mean score of those who passed was 78, and the mean score of those who failed was 26. The mean of all scores was 72.

How many students failed the exam?

How many students failed the exam?

asked 2020-12-25

Find the x-and y-intercepts of the graph of the equation algebraically.

$y=12-5x$

asked 2022-06-02

I just started my first upper level undergrad course, and as we were being taught vector spaces over fields we quickly went over fields. What confused me that the the set {0, 1, 2} was a field. However, to my understanding, that set doesn't satisfy the axiom, "For every element a in F, there is an element b such that a+b=0", among others. Can someone help clarify where my understanding is off.

Also one my friend states "for every prime power p^n, there exists a field with ${p}^{n}$ elements" and then doesn't expand on it. If someone could give an example or proof i would be very grateful.

Also one my friend states "for every prime power p^n, there exists a field with ${p}^{n}$ elements" and then doesn't expand on it. If someone could give an example or proof i would be very grateful.

asked 2020-11-14

To state:Null hypothesis and alternative hypothesis.

asked 2021-09-30

Starting from the point $(3,-2,-1)$ , reparametrize the curve $x\left(t\right)=(3-3t,-2-t,-1-t)$ in terms of arclength.