You are not logged in.
Ohh right. So what happens to 1? Doe that get subtractedm or replaced by (y-1) ??
Offline
Anything that is over 1 is the number itself.
In mathematics, you don't understand things. You just get used to them.
If it ain't broke, fix it until it is.
Always satisfy the Prime Directive of getting the right answer above all else.
Offline
Ohh i see.
Offline
Since x is also like a number then
In mathematics, you don't understand things. You just get used to them.
If it ain't broke, fix it until it is.
Always satisfy the Prime Directive of getting the right answer above all else.
Offline
Yea I get your example Its bringing back memories.
Offline
Okay, we are here
The right side become just 2.
Now to get the x by itself we need to move the (y-1) to the other side. Since the right side is really x * (y-1) that is a multiplication. The inverse operator is division. So to move it we use a divide by (y-1) to both sides.
Are you okay up to here?
In mathematics, you don't understand things. You just get used to them.
If it ain't broke, fix it until it is.
Always satisfy the Prime Directive of getting the right answer above all else.
Offline
hmm..I'm not too certain on line 3. :'(
Offline
Hi;
What I did was divide by (y-1) on both sides.
In mathematics, you don't understand things. You just get used to them.
If it ain't broke, fix it until it is.
Always satisfy the Prime Directive of getting the right answer above all else.
Offline
OHH i get it.
Offline
Okay, then we are almost done.
On the left side you see that there is a (y-1) on top and bottom we can cancel them. (y-1)/(y-1)= 1
That is what we are left with.
In mathematics, you don't understand things. You just get used to them.
If it ain't broke, fix it until it is.
Always satisfy the Prime Directive of getting the right answer above all else.
Offline
Ohhh I see. This looks quick a long process to solve this problem.
Offline
It only looks tough the first time you see it. IT had some differences in it. Did you understand some of that?
In mathematics, you don't understand things. You just get used to them.
If it ain't broke, fix it until it is.
Always satisfy the Prime Directive of getting the right answer above all else.
Offline
Yes I did. Just hope this doesn't pop up in the exam tomorrow.
Offline
Why not? You should be a little ready for it. Just relax and remember what you have learned.
In mathematics, you don't understand things. You just get used to them.
If it ain't broke, fix it until it is.
Always satisfy the Prime Directive of getting the right answer above all else.
Offline
True. I am ready for it, but there are bits that are too complex. I'm going to do my best for it.
Offline
Hi;
I wish you good luck. Please let me know how you do.
In mathematics, you don't understand things. You just get used to them.
If it ain't broke, fix it until it is.
Always satisfy the Prime Directive of getting the right answer above all else.
Offline
Thank you . Oh One last question. In this set: {(2,2),(1,3),(2,3),(3,3)} This isn't Reflexive because there's no (1,1)? Just double checking.
Offline
For what relation?
In mathematics, you don't understand things. You just get used to them.
If it ain't broke, fix it until it is.
Always satisfy the Prime Directive of getting the right answer above all else.
Offline
Just checking if it's a reflective relation or not. In here: A={1,2,3} and the sets are set out as {(2,2),(1,3),(2,3),(3,3)}. Does this prove it's not Reflexive because (1,1) isn't in that set?
Offline
Yes, it is not reflexive.
In mathematics, you don't understand things. You just get used to them.
If it ain't broke, fix it until it is.
Always satisfy the Prime Directive of getting the right answer above all else.
Offline
Okay. thank you once again. Thanks for all the help bobby and Mathisfun.
Offline
Good luck and do well!
In mathematics, you don't understand things. You just get used to them.
If it ain't broke, fix it until it is.
Always satisfy the Prime Directive of getting the right answer above all else.
Offline