Comparing Perimeter and Area Compare the perimeter and area of the original figure to
the perimeter and area of the reduced figure using the
scale factor
Which statements are true about the comparison
between the two figures? Check all that apply.
The scale factor is 2.
The scale factor is
2.
6
The perimeter of the model is the product of the
scale factor and the perimeter of the original
rectangle
The area of the reduced figure is half the area of
the original figure
1
The area of the reduced figure is
times the
3
area of the original figure,
Intro
Done

- The scale factor is one-half

- The perimeter of the model is the product of the scale factor and the perimeter of the original rectangle

-The area of the reduced figure is (1/2)^2 = 1/4 times the area of the original figure

Step-by-step explanation:

The ratio of the length of the original rectangle to that of the reduced rectangle is 6 to 3, or a factor of 1/2. The ratio of the width of the original rectangle to that of the reduced rectangle is 2 to 1, or, again, a factor of 1/2. So, because this ratio of 1/2 is constant, we know the total scale factor is 1/2, making B correct.

The perimeter of a rectangle is: , where l is the length and w is the width. The perimeter of the reduced figure is: P = 2 * 3 + 2 * 1 = 6 + 2 = 8 units. The perimeter of the original figure is: P = 2 * 6 + 2 * 2 = 12 + 4 = 16 units.

Notice that 16 * (1/2) = 8, which means that the perimeter of the scale-factored, reduced rectangle is "the product of the scale factor (which is 1/2) and the perimeter of the original rectangle (which is 16)". So, C is correct.

The area of a rectangle is: , where l is the length and w is the width. The area of the reduced figure is: A = 3 * 1 = 3 units squared. The area of the original figure is: A = 6 * 2 = 12 units squared.

Notice that 12 * (1/4) = 3, which means that E is correct, but D is wrong.

Hope this helps!

when functions are first introduced, you will probably have some simplistic "functions" and relations to deal with, usually being just sets of points. these won't be terribly useful or interesting functions and relations, but your text wants you to get the idea of what the domain and range of a function are. small sets of points are generally the simplest sorts of relations, so your book starts with those.

step-by-step explanation:

state the domain and range of the following relation. is the relation a function?

{(2, –3), (4, 6), (3, –1), (6, 6), (2, 3)}

the above list of points, being a relationship between certain x's and certain y's, is a relation. the domain is all the x-values, and the range is all the y-values. to give the domain and the range, i just list the values without duplication:

domain: {2, 3, 4, 6}

range: {–3, –1, 3, 6}

(it is customary to list these values in numerical order, but it is not required. sets are called "unordered lists", so you can list the numbers in any order you feel like. just don't duplicate: technically, repetitions are okay in sets, but most instructors would count off for this.)

while the given set does indeed represent a relation (because x's and y's are being related to each other), the set they gave me contains two points with the same x-value: (2, –3) and (2, 3). since x = 2 gives me two possible destinations (that is, two possible y-values), then this relation is not a function.

note that all i had to do to check whether the relation was a function was to look for duplicate x-values. if you find any duplicate x-values, then the different y-values mean that you do not have a function. remember: for a relation to be a function, each x-value has to go to one, and only one, y-value.

state the domain and range of the following relation. is the relation a function?

{(–3, 5), (–2, 5), (–1, 5), (0, 5), (1, 5), (2, 5)}

i'll just list the x-values for the domain and the y-values for the range:

3

step-by-step explanation: