Get reliable answers to your questions at Westonci.ca, where our knowledgeable community is always ready to help. Join our Q&A platform to connect with experts dedicated to providing accurate answers to your questions in various fields. Join our platform to connect with experts ready to provide precise answers to your questions in different areas.
Sagot :
To determine the correct piecewise equation that models the total weekly pay [tex]\( y \)[/tex] for an engineering technician, let's break the problem into the two distinct scenarios provided:
1. For [tex]\( 0 \leq x \leq 40 \)[/tex]:
- The technician is paid [tex]$25 per hour for the first 40 hours. - Therefore, the pay for \( x \) hours worked is simply \( y = 25x \). 2. For \( x > 40 \): - For the first 40 hours, the technician earns \( 25 \times 40 = 1000 \) dollars. - For any hours beyond 40, the technician is paid $[/tex]32 per hour.
- If the total hours [tex]\( x \)[/tex] exceeds 40, then the pay for the hours beyond 40 hours (i.e., for [tex]\( x - 40 \)[/tex] hours) is [tex]\( 32 \times (x - 40) \)[/tex].
- Therefore, for [tex]\( x > 40 \)[/tex], the total pay [tex]\( y \)[/tex] is the sum of these two components:
- [tex]\( 1000 \)[/tex] dollars for the first 40 hours,
- Plus [tex]\( 32 \times (x - 40) \)[/tex] dollars for the hours exceeding 40.
- This results in the equation [tex]\( y = 1000 + 32(x - 40) \)[/tex].
Given these analyses, we can now match the piecewise functions with the choices provided:
A. [tex]\( y = \left\{\begin{array}{ll}25x & 0 \leq x \leq 40 \\ 32x + 1000 & x > 40 \end{array}\right. \)[/tex] – Incorrect, as the component for [tex]\( x > 40 \)[/tex] does not consider the reduction of 40 hours from [tex]\( x \)[/tex] before multiplying by 32.
B. [tex]\( y = \left\{\begin{array}{ll}25x & 0 \leq x \leq 40 \\ 32(x - 40) + 1000 & x > 40 \end{array}\right. \)[/tex] – Correct, as it correctly calculates the pay for [tex]\( x > 40 \)[/tex] hours using [tex]\( y = 1000 + 32(x - 40) \)[/tex].
C. [tex]\( y = \left\{\begin{array}{ll}25x & 0 \leq x \leq 40 \\ 32x & x > 40 \end{array}\right. \)[/tex] – Incorrect, as it wrongly applies the rate of [tex]$32 to all hours worked beyond 40 without considering the first 40 hours at $[/tex]25 per hour.
D. [tex]\( y = \left\{\begin{array}{l}25x \\ 32(x - 48) \end{array}\right. \)[/tex] for [tex]\( 0 \leq x \leq 40 \)[/tex] and [tex]\( x > 40 \)[/tex] – Incorrect, as the formulation for [tex]\( x > 40 \)[/tex] does not align with the given pay rates and hours.
Therefore, the correct piecewise equation that models her total weekly pay [tex]\( y \)[/tex] in dollars as it relates to the number of hours [tex]\( x \)[/tex] worked during the week is:
B. [tex]\( y = \left\{\begin{array}{ll}25x & 0 \leq x \leq 40 \\ 32(x - 40) + 1000 & x > 40 \end{array}\right. \)[/tex]
1. For [tex]\( 0 \leq x \leq 40 \)[/tex]:
- The technician is paid [tex]$25 per hour for the first 40 hours. - Therefore, the pay for \( x \) hours worked is simply \( y = 25x \). 2. For \( x > 40 \): - For the first 40 hours, the technician earns \( 25 \times 40 = 1000 \) dollars. - For any hours beyond 40, the technician is paid $[/tex]32 per hour.
- If the total hours [tex]\( x \)[/tex] exceeds 40, then the pay for the hours beyond 40 hours (i.e., for [tex]\( x - 40 \)[/tex] hours) is [tex]\( 32 \times (x - 40) \)[/tex].
- Therefore, for [tex]\( x > 40 \)[/tex], the total pay [tex]\( y \)[/tex] is the sum of these two components:
- [tex]\( 1000 \)[/tex] dollars for the first 40 hours,
- Plus [tex]\( 32 \times (x - 40) \)[/tex] dollars for the hours exceeding 40.
- This results in the equation [tex]\( y = 1000 + 32(x - 40) \)[/tex].
Given these analyses, we can now match the piecewise functions with the choices provided:
A. [tex]\( y = \left\{\begin{array}{ll}25x & 0 \leq x \leq 40 \\ 32x + 1000 & x > 40 \end{array}\right. \)[/tex] – Incorrect, as the component for [tex]\( x > 40 \)[/tex] does not consider the reduction of 40 hours from [tex]\( x \)[/tex] before multiplying by 32.
B. [tex]\( y = \left\{\begin{array}{ll}25x & 0 \leq x \leq 40 \\ 32(x - 40) + 1000 & x > 40 \end{array}\right. \)[/tex] – Correct, as it correctly calculates the pay for [tex]\( x > 40 \)[/tex] hours using [tex]\( y = 1000 + 32(x - 40) \)[/tex].
C. [tex]\( y = \left\{\begin{array}{ll}25x & 0 \leq x \leq 40 \\ 32x & x > 40 \end{array}\right. \)[/tex] – Incorrect, as it wrongly applies the rate of [tex]$32 to all hours worked beyond 40 without considering the first 40 hours at $[/tex]25 per hour.
D. [tex]\( y = \left\{\begin{array}{l}25x \\ 32(x - 48) \end{array}\right. \)[/tex] for [tex]\( 0 \leq x \leq 40 \)[/tex] and [tex]\( x > 40 \)[/tex] – Incorrect, as the formulation for [tex]\( x > 40 \)[/tex] does not align with the given pay rates and hours.
Therefore, the correct piecewise equation that models her total weekly pay [tex]\( y \)[/tex] in dollars as it relates to the number of hours [tex]\( x \)[/tex] worked during the week is:
B. [tex]\( y = \left\{\begin{array}{ll}25x & 0 \leq x \leq 40 \\ 32(x - 40) + 1000 & x > 40 \end{array}\right. \)[/tex]
We hope you found this helpful. Feel free to come back anytime for more accurate answers and updated information. Thank you for your visit. We're dedicated to helping you find the information you need, whenever you need it. Westonci.ca is your trusted source for answers. Visit us again to find more information on diverse topics.
