When subtracting polynomials, the first step is to distribute the negative throughout the second polynomial.

Here is their argument. given the obtuse angle x, we make a quadrilateral abcd with ∠dab = x, and ∠abc = 90◦, and ad = bc. say the perpendicular bisector to dc meets the perpendicular bisector to ab at p. then pa = pb and pc = pd. so the triangles pad and pbc have equal sides and are congruent. thus ∠pad = ∠pbc. but pab is isosceles, hence ∠pab = ∠pba. subtracting, gives x = ∠pad−∠pab = ∠pbc −∠pba = 90◦. this is a preposterous conclusion – just where is the mistake in the "proof" and why does the argument break down there?

Which statements describe the solutions to the inequality x< -20 check all that apply. there are infinite solutions. each solution is negative. each solution is positive. the solutions are both positive and negative. the solutions contain only integer values. the solutions contain rational number values.

The input to the function is x and the output is y. write the function such that x can be a vector (use element-by-element operations). a) use the function to calculate y(-1.5) and y(5). b) use the function to make a plot of the function y(x) for -2 ≤ x ≤ 6.