• We need your support!

    We are currently struggling to cover the operational costs of Xtremepapers, as a result we might have to shut this website down. Please donate if we have helped you and help make a difference in other students' lives!
    Click here to Donate Now (View Announcement)

Maths, Addmaths and Statistics: Post your doubts here!

Messages
265
Reaction score
76
Points
38
in part iv can we write answer without using graph??
 

Attachments

  • Untitled.png
    Untitled.png
    46.8 KB · Views: 7
Messages
2,797
Reaction score
2,035
Points
273
Q.7 How to find x-co-ordinate of D?

y-coordinate of D = 8
Gradient AD = 4/x+5
Gradient BC = 4/-2 = -2
Since BC is the perpendicular bisector of AD,
Gradient AD = -1/Gradient BC
4/x+5 = -1/-2
4 = x+5/2
8 = x+5
x = 3

For E,
Equation of AE => 2y - x = 13
Equation of BC => y + 2x = 20
Solving Simultaneously gives us,
E = (5.4, 9.2).
 
Messages
419
Reaction score
690
Points
103
Saad Mughal
In Linear Law questions, Do we always get the y-intercept from the graph, or can we also using (x,y) and gradient to get it?
 
Messages
3,225
Reaction score
15,036
Points
523
Saad Mughal
In Linear Law questions, Do we always get the y-intercept from the graph, or can we also using (x,y) and gradient to get it?


You can either get the Y intercept by the "Coordinates" given on the line or use the Gradient and (x,y) to fine the "y=mx+c" equation ,Note "c" is the y intercept
 
Messages
620
Reaction score
9,085
Points
503
I did the same. But I don't get the logic of the multiplication.
The direction and Cartesian plane method is more logical.

In this question we have to first calculate the angle for 3i and 4j as tan(inverse) 4 divided by3. we'll get the velocity vector this way and then we'll multiply iit with t to getits position.
 
Messages
2,797
Reaction score
2,035
Points
273
In this question we have to first calculate the angle for 3i and 4j as tan(inverse) 4 divided by3. we'll get the velocity vector this way and then we'll multiply iit with t to getits position.

I know that and I'm saying that this is the proper and logical method of doing this.
In the other method, where we calculate the unit vector of the direction and multiply by the speed to get the velocity vector is illogical.
 
Messages
620
Reaction score
9,085
Points
503
I know that and I'm saying that this is the proper and logical method of doing this.
In the other method, where we calculate the unit vector of the direction and multiply by the speed to get the velocity vector is illogical.

well, i never knew the other method :p so how did it go today?
 
Messages
620
Reaction score
9,085
Points
503
I know that and I'm saying that this is the proper and logical method of doing this.
In the other method, where we calculate the unit vector of the direction and multiply by the speed to get the velocity vector is illogical.

well, i never knew the other method :p so how did it go today?
 
Messages
1,983
Reaction score
3,044
Points
273
I did the same. But I don't get the logic of the multiplication.
The direction and Cartesian plane method is more logical.
These vectors ae just unut vectors which show direction. We need to find vector. Thats why we multiply so magnitude of vector is same as the magnitude given.
 
Top