Denise G. answered 01/16/20
Algebra, College Algebra, Prealgebra, Precalculus, GED, ASVAB Tutor
I can find the equation for this. But cannot tell based on how the problem is worded is the points that lie on the boundary line are a part of the solution or not.
First, find the slope using the points on the boundary line.
m=(y2-y1)/(x2-x1)
m=(8-(-16))/(1-(-7)
m=(8+16)/(1+7)
m=24/8
m=3
Next, you can use this formula and plug in the slope and one of the points rrom the boundary line
(y-y1)=m(x-x1)
(y-8)=3(m-1) Distribute
y-8=3m-3 Add 8 to both sides
y-8+8=3m-3+8
y=3m+5
I sketched the equation and the points that were not a part of the solution. It looked like the inequalities should be less than. So I tested it out to confirm. The points should give a false statement.
y<3x+5
0<3(-7)+5
0<-21+5
0<-16 is false, so the equation is correct.
y<3x+5 if the boundary points are NOT a part of the solution
y≤3x+5 if the boundary points ARE a part of the solution


David W.
Nathan, the problem statement said, "...(3, 14) are not solutions of the inequality" AND "...(3,14) not on boundary line." In fact, the point (3,14) IS ON THE BOUNDARY LINE but, as you pointed out, point (3,14) is not a solution. So, the inequality is "less than" and the problem statement is inconsistent.01/16/20
Nathan B.
As an addendum to your work, let's look at the second set offered: (3, 14) 14 = 3 * 3 + 5 14 = 9 + 5 14 = 14 So the two sides do equate, meaning it would lie on the line, but as the set point is barred, that means that it is a 'less than' inequality and not a 'less than or equal to' inequality.01/16/20