Which of the following statements best explains why the point (2, –2) is not a solution to the system of inequalities graphed below? a. the point (2, –2) satisfies the red inequality but not the blue inequality. b. the point (2, –2) satisfies the blue inequality but not the red inequality. c. the point (2, –2) doesn’t satisfy either the red or the blue inequalities. d. the point (2, –2) satisfies both the red and the blue inequalities.

A or B

Step-by-step explanation:

Im not saying it is both but those are two that you can narrow it down to. If you have actual inequalities then put the positive two in for the variable to see if the inequality is true or not. Sorry if this doesn't exactly help.

C. The point (2,-2) doesn’t satisfy either the red or the blue inequalities.

Step-by-step explanation:

There are two types of inequalities: the strict, when write it has the symbol  > or <, and the non-strict one,  with ≥ or ≤. In a graph, the difference goes in the line that divides the area of the solution. Non-strict inequality uses a normal line, because all the points in the line are part of the solution,  while the strict inequality uses a dashed line, because the line shows us where is the answer but is not part of it. The point (2,-2) is part of the blue and the red line, but these lines are dashed. This means this point is not part of the solution of the red inequality nor part of the solution of the blue inequality.

it's equivalent, so we can say that its equal.

let's call the denominator x and the numerador is 18 less then denominator, x - 18.

multiply

2.x = 5.(x - 18)

2x = 5x - 90

90 = 5x - 2x

90 = 3x

x = 90/3

x = 30

so:

substitute,

circle 1 = 5

circle 2 = 20

circle 3 = 44

in this case no matter how you add, you will always get a perfect square..

hence proved

happy to

pls mark as brainliest