Raymond B. answered 01/17/21
Math, microeconomics or criminal justice
y=3-x
y=x^2
x^2 = 3-x
x^2+x = 3
x^2 +x + 1/4 = 3+ 1/4
(x+1/2)^2 = 13/4
x + 1/2 = + (1/2)sqr13
x=(sqr13-1)/2 = 1.3 (ignore the negative square root, it's where the parabola intersects the line in quadrant II)
Area = integral of x^2 evaluated from 0 to (sqr13-1)/2 = 0.74
plus area of a right triangle = (1/2)bh = .5(1.3)(1.7) = 1.11
1.11+ 0.74 = 1.85
There may be an ambiguity in the problem. y=0 seems to require that the x-axis is one side of the area, so that the area is entirely in quadrant I. with the upper boundary the parabola only between x=0 and x= about 1.3 and the upper boundary the line 3-x between x=1.3 and x=3.
However, if you ignored y=0 and looked only for the area between the parabola and the line, you'd get a different area, mostly in quadrant II. That area could have just as easily been described as bounded by y=any negative number, making y=0 superfluous or irrelevant to the problem. Because y=0 is an explicit boundary. the required area seems to be the area in quadrant I, with area = about 1.85


William W.
I guess we'll have to agree to disagree.01/17/21
William W.
y = 0 is the x-axis and consequently only eliminates quadrant 3 and 4, not Q201/17/21