Devon thinks her function machine is broken. She dropped in a number, but nothing has come out. "First I dropped in 16, and the output was 4. Then I dropped in 9 and the output was 3. But I just dropped in -4 and nothing is coming out." "Ah," Michael says, "I think your machine is working just fine." What do you think the function is? Does Devon have a broken function machine or has Michael figured something out? Justify your answer completely.

step-by-step explanation:

< xcy ≅ < xby

step-by-step explanation:

in δcax and δbax,

so, δcax ≅ δbax (side-angle-side or sas)

since δcax ≅ δbax, we can conclude < acx ≅ < abx

in δacy and δaby,

so, δacy ≅ δaby (side-angle-side or sas)

since δacy ≅ δaby, we can conclude < acy ≅ < aby

now,

< acy ≅ < aby

=> < acx + < xcy ≅ < abx + < xby

=> < acx + < xcy ≅ < acx + < xby   (since < acx ≅ < abx already proved above)

subtracting < acx from both sides, we get

< acx + < xcy -< acx ≅ < acx + < xby -< acx

cancelling out < acx and -< acx from both sides, we get

< xcy ≅ < xby (proved)

110698.56 square miles

step-by-step explanation:

multiply 3.8 by 102

387.6

multiply 2.8 by 102

285.6

multiply those two to get

i think the answer is a.( -3, -1 )