One business charges 12 dollars per t shirt custom made. Another business charges 11 dollars per t shirt plus a 20 dollar set up fee for custom made. If you were to graph both of these scenarios on the coordinate plane, the first graph would be proportional and the second non proportional. How would you transform the first graph to make it become a non proportional graph with the same y-intercept as the second graph
To transform the first graph to make it non-proportional, we need to add a constant value to the y-values of the first graph. This constant value will represent the set-up fee of $20. By adding $20 to each y-value, we are essentially combining the cost per t-shirt ($12) and the set-up fee ($20) into a single value.
So, the transformed y-values for the first graph will be: y + 20.
This transformation will make the first graph non-proportional with the same y-intercept as the second graph.
the answer choices are:
A. Left 20
B. Right 1
C. Left 1
D. Up 1
E. Right 20
F. Up 20
To transform the first graph to become non-proportional with the same y-intercept as the second graph, we need to add the set-up fee of $20 to each y-value on the first graph.
Since adding a value to the y-values will shift the graph upwards, the correct answer choice would be:
F. Up 20
are you sure
Apologies for the confusion. Let's reconsider the transformation:
In the first graph, the cost per t-shirt is $12 and there is no set-up fee. To make it non-proportional and have the same y-intercept as the second graph, we need to add the set-up fee of $20 to each y-value in the first graph.
In this case, the correct answer choice would be:
F. Up 20
To transform the first graph to make it non-proportional with the same y-intercept as the second graph, we need to introduce a fixed cost or additional fee to the first business's pricing system. Let's call this additional fee "F".
Given that the first business charges $12 per t-shirt custom made, we can rewrite this as:
Cost = $12 * Number of T-Shirts
To make it non-proportional, we can add the fixed cost "F" to the cost of each t-shirt. So, the modified equation becomes:
Cost = ($12 * Number of T-Shirts) + F
To have the same y-intercept as the second graph, which is the set-up fee of $20, we can set F = $20.
Therefore, the transformed equation becomes:
Cost = ($12 * Number of T-Shirts) + $20
By graphing this transformed equation on the coordinate plane, we will have a non-proportional graph with the same y-intercept as the second graph.
To transform the first graph into a non-proportional graph with the same y-intercept as the second graph, you would need to introduce a fixed cost or set up fee. This is because the second graph includes a $20 set up fee in addition to the $11 per t-shirt charge.
To incorporate this into the first graph, you need to add a constant value to the equation for the first graph. The equation for the first graph, which represents the cost of getting custom t-shirts from the first business, would be C = 12t, where C is the total cost and t is the number of t-shirts.
To make this equation non-proportional, you can add the $20 set up fee to the equation. The modified equation would be C = 12t + 20.
Now, when you graph both equations on the coordinate plane, the first graph represents the cost from the first business without the set up fee, while the second graph represents the cost from the second business with the set up fee included. Both graphs would have the same y-intercept, which is $20, but the second graph would not be directly proportional to the number of t-shirts.
In summary, to transform the first graph into a non-proportional graph with the same y-intercept as the second graph, you would modify the equation by adding the set up fee to the cost per t-shirt.