7 ≥ 0,
We can use the same process for solving cubic inequalities, biquadratic inequalities, etc.
An absolute value inequality includes an algebraic expression inside the absolute value sign. Here is the process of solving absolute value inequalities where the process is explained with an example of solving an absolute value inequality |x + 3| ≤ 2. If you want to learn different methods of solving absolute value inequalities, click here .
Interval | Random Number | Checking the Inequality |
---|---|---|
(-∞, -5] | -6 | |-6 + 3| ≤ 2 3 ≤ 2, |
[-5, -1] | -3 | |-3 + 3| ≤ 2 0 ≤ 2, |
[-1, ∞) | 0 | |0 + 3| ≤ 2 3 ≤ 2, |
Rational inequalities are inequalities that involve rational expressions (fractions with variables). To solve the rational inequalities (inequalities with fractions), we just use the same procedure as other inequalities but we have to take care of the excluded points . For example, while solving the rational inequality (x + 2) / (x - 2) < 3, we should note that the rational expression (x + 2) / (x - 2) is NOT defined at x = 2 (set the denominator x - 2 = 0 ⇒x = 2). Let us solve this inequality step by step.
Interval | Random Number | Checking the inequality |
---|---|---|
(-∞, 2) | 0 | (0 + 2) / (0 - 2) < 3 -1 < 3, |
(2, 4) | 3 | (3 + 2) / (3 - 2) < 3 5 < 3, |
(4, ∞) | 5 | (5 + 2) / (5 - 2) < 3 2.3 < 3, |
Important Notes on Inequalities:
Here are the notes about inequalities:
☛ Related Topics:
Example 1: Using the techniques of solving inequalities, solve: -19 < 3x + 2 ≤ 17 and write the answer in the interval notation.
Given that -19 < 3x + 2 ≤ 17.
This is a compound inequality.
Subtracting 2 from all sides,
-21 < 3x ≤ 15
Dividing all sides by 3,
-7 < x ≤ 5
Answer: The solution is (-7, 5].
Example 2: While solving inequalities, explain why each of the following statements is incorrect. Also, correct them. a) 2x < 5 ⇒ x > 5/2 b) x > 3 ⇒ x ∈ [3, ∞) c) -x > -7 ⇒ x > 7.
a) 2x < 5. Here, when we divide both sides by 2, which is a positive number, the sign does not change. So the correct inequality is x < 5/2.
b) x > 3. It does not include an equal to symbol. So 3 should NOT be included in the interval. So the correct interval is (3, ∞).
c) -x > -7. When we divide both sides by -1, a negative number, the sign should change. So the correct inequality is x < 7.
Answer: The corrected ones are a) x < 5/2; b) x ∈ (3, ∞); c) x < 7.
Example 3: Solve the inequality x 2 - 7x + 10 < 0.
First, solve the equation x 2 - 7x + 10 = 0.
(x - 2) (x - 5) = 0.
x = 2, x = 5.
If we represent these numbers on the number line, we get the following intervals: (-∞, 2), (2, 5), and (5, ∞).
Let us take some random numbers from each interval to test the given quadratic inequality.
Interval | Random Number | Checking the Inequality |
---|---|---|
(-∞, 2) | 0 | 0 - 7(0) + 10 < 0 10 < 0, |
(2, 5) | 3 | 3 - 7(3) + 10 < 0 -2 < 0, |
(5, ∞) | 6 | 6 - 7(6) + 10 < 0 4 < 0, |
Therefore, the only interval that satisfies the inequality is (2, 5).
Answer: The solution is (2, 5).
go to slide go to slide go to slide
Book a Free Trial Class
go to slide go to slide
What are inequalities in math.
When two or more algebraic expressions are compared using the symbols <, > ≤, or ≥, then they form an inequality. They are the mathematical expressions in which both sides are not equal.
To plot an inequality in math, such as x>3, on a number line,
To calculate inequalities :
Solving inequalities graphically is possible when we have a system of two inequalities in two variables. In this case, we consider both inequalities as two linear equations and graph them. Then we get two lines. Shade the upper/lower portion of each of the lines that satisfies the inequality. The common portion of both shaded regions is the solution region.
Here are the differences between equations and inequalities.
Equations | Inequalities |
---|---|
1. Equations have "=" symbol in it. | 1. Inequalities have ">", "<", "≥", or "≤" in it |
2. The number of solutions of an equation depends on the of the equation. | 2. An inequality may have a single, unique, or no solution. It doesn't depend on the degree. |
3. By applying any operation on both sides, an equation still holds. | 3. If we multiply/divide both sides of an inequality by a negative number, the sign changes. |
A square of a number is always greater than or equal to zero p 2 ≥ 0. Example: (4) 2 = 16, (−4) 2 = 16, (0) 2 = 0
Calculating inequalities with fractions is just like solving any other inequality. One easy way of solving such inequalities is to multiply every term on both sides by the LCD of all denominators so that all fractions become integers . For example, to solve (1/2) x + 1 > (3/4) x + 2, multiply both sides by 4. Then we get 2x + 4 > 3x + 8 ⇒ -x > 4 ⇒ x < -4.
When an inequality has a variable on both sides, we have to try to isolate the variable. But in this process, flip the inequality sign whenever we are dividing or multiplying both sides by a negative number. Here is an example. 3x - 7 < 5x - 11 ⇒ -2x < -4 ⇒ x > 2.
You can find the range of values of x, by solving the inequality by considering it as a normal linear equation.
The 5 inequality symbols are less than (<), greater than (>), less than or equal (≤), greater than or equal (≥), and the not equal symbol (≠).
Equations and inequalities are mathematical sentences formed by relating two expressions to each other. In an equation, the two expressions are supposed to be equal and shown by the symbol =. Whereas in inequality, the two expressions are not necessarily equal and are indicated by the symbols: >, <, ≤ or ≥.
inequalities-calculator
Please add a message.
Message received. Thanks for the feedback.
In chapter 2 we established rules for solving equations using the numbers of arithmetic. Now that we have learned the operations on signed numbers, we will use those same rules to solve equations that involve negative numbers. We will also study techniques for solving and graphing inequalities having one unknown.
Upon completing this section you should be able to solve equations involving signed numbers.
Example 1 Solve for x and check: x + 5 = 3
Using the same procedures learned in chapter 2, we subtract 5 from each side of the equation obtaining
Example 2 Solve for x and check: - 3x = 12
Dividing each side by -3, we obtain
An equation having more than one letter is sometimes called a literal equation . It is occasionally necessary to solve such an equation for one of the letters in terms of the others. The step-by-step procedure discussed and used in chapter 2 is still valid after any grouping symbols are removed.
Example 1 Solve for c: 3(x + c) - 4y = 2x - 5c
First remove parentheses.
At this point we note that since we are solving for c, we want to obtain c on one side and all other terms on the other side of the equation. Thus we obtain
Sometimes the form of an answer can be changed. In this example we could multiply both numerator and denominator of the answer by (- l) (this does not change the value of the answer) and obtain
The advantage of this last expression over the first is that there are not so many negative signs in the answer.
The most commonly used literal expressions are formulas from geometry, physics, business, electronics, and so forth.
Notice in this example that r was left on the right side and thus the computation was simpler. We can rewrite the answer another way if we wish.
The symbols are inequality symbols or order relations and are used to show the relative sizes of the values of two numbers. We usually read the symbol as "greater than." For instance, a > b is read as "a is greater than b." Notice that we have stated that we usually read a < b as a is less than b. But this is only because we read from left to right. In other words, "a is less than b" is the same as saying "b is greater than a." Actually then, we have one symbol that is written two ways only for convenience of reading. One way to remember the meaning of the symbol is that the pointed end is toward the lesser of the two numbers.
In simpler words this definition states that a is less than b if we must add something to a to get b. Of course, the "something" must be positive.
If you think of the number line, you know that adding a positive number is equivalent to moving to the right on the number line. This gives rise to the following alternative definition, which may be easier to visualize.
Example 1 3 < 6, because 3 is to the left of 6 on the number line.
Example 2 - 4 < 0, because -4 is to the left of 0 on the number line.
Example 3 4 > - 2, because 4 is to the right of -2 on the number line.
Example 4 - 6 < - 2, because -6 is to the left of -2 on the number line.
The mathematical statement x < 3, read as "x is less than 3," indicates that the variable x can be any number less than (or to the left of) 3. Remember, we are considering the real numbers and not just integers, so do not think of the values of x for x < 3 as only 2, 1,0, - 1, and so on.
As a matter of fact, to name the number x that is the largest number less than 3 is an impossible task. It can be indicated on the number line, however. To do this we need a symbol to represent the meaning of a statement such as x < 3.
The symbols ( and ) used on the number line indicate that the endpoint is not included in the set.
Example 5 Graph x < 3 on the number line.
Note that the graph has an arrow indicating that the line continues without end to the left.
Example 6 Graph x > 4 on the number line.
Example 7 Graph x > -5 on the number line.
Example 8 Make a number line graph showing that x > - 1 and x < 5. (The word "and" means that both conditions must apply.)
Example 9 Graph - 3 < x < 3.
Example 10 x >; 4 indicates the number 4 and all real numbers to the right of 4 on the number line.
The symbols [ and ] used on the number line indicate that the endpoint is included in the set.
Example 13 Write an algebraic statement represented by the following graph.
Example 14 Write an algebraic statement for the following graph.
-4 and 5. |
Example 15 Write an algebraic statement for the following graph.
-2. |
Upon completing this section you should be able to solve inequalities involving one unknown.
The solutions for inequalities generally involve the same basic rules as equations. There is one exception, which we will soon discover. The first rule, however, is similar to that used in solving equations.
If the same quantity is added to each side of an inequality , the results are unequal in the same order.
Example 1 If 5 < 8, then 5 + 2 < 8 + 2.
Example 2 If 7 < 10, then 7 - 3 < 10 - 3.
We can use this rule to solve certain inequalities.
Example 3 Solve for x: x + 6 < 10
If we add -6 to each side, we obtain
Graphing this solution on the number line, we have
We will now use the addition rule to illustrate an important concept concerning multiplication or division of inequalities.
Suppose x > a.
Now add - x to both sides by the addition rule.
Now add -a to both sides.
The last statement, - a > -x, can be rewritten as - x < -a. Therefore we can say, "If x > a, then - x < -a. This translates into the following rule:
If an inequality is multiplied or divided by a negative number, the results will be unequal in the opposite order.
Example 5 Solve for x and graph the solution: -2x>6
To obtain x on the left side we must divide each term by - 2. Notice that since we are dividing by a negative number, we must change the direction of the inequality.
Take special note of this fact. Each time you divide or multiply by a negative number, you must change the direction of the inequality symbol. This is the only difference between solving equations and solving inequalities.
Once we have removed parentheses and have only individual terms in an expression, the procedure for finding a solution is almost like that in chapter 2.
Let us now review the step-by-step method from chapter 2 and note the difference when solving inequalities.
First Eliminate fractions by multiplying all terms by the least common denominator of all fractions. (No change when we are multiplying by a positive number.) Second Simplify by combining like terms on each side of the inequality. (No change) Third Add or subtract quantities to obtain the unknown on one side and the numbers on the other. (No change) Fourth Divide each term of the inequality by the coefficient of the unknown. If the coefficient is positive, the inequality will remain the same. If the coefficient is negative, the inequality will be reversed. (This is the important difference between equations and inequalities.)
More solvers.
Intro & Formatting Worked Examples Harder Examples & Word Prob's
Once you'd learned how to solve one-variable linear equations, you were then given word problems. To solve these problems, you'd have to figure out a linear equation that modelled the situation, and then you'd have to solve that equation to find the answer to the word problem.
Content Continues Below
Solving Inequalities
So, now that you know how to solve linear inequalities — you guessed it! — they give you word problems.
This question is asking when the velocity, V , will be between two given values. So I'll take the expression for the velocity,, and put it between the two values they've given me. They've specified that the interval of velocities is inclusive, which means that the interval endpoints are included. Mathematically, this means that the inequality for this model will be an "or equal to" inequality. Because the solution is a bracket (that is, the solution is within an interval), I'll need to set up a three-part (that is, a compound) inequality.
I will set up the compound inequality, and then solve for the range of times t :
32 ≤ 80 − 32 t ≤ 64
32 − 80 ≤ 80 − 80 − 32 t ≤ 64 − 80
−48 ≤ −32 t ≤ −16
−48 / −32 ≥ −32 t / −32 ≥ −16 / −32
1.5 ≥ t ≥ 0.5
Note that, since I had to divide through by a negative, I had to flip the inequality signs.
Advertisement
Note also that you might (as I do) find the above answer to be more easily understood if it's written the other way around, with "less than" inequalities.
And, because this is a (sort of) real world problem, my working should show the fractions, but my answer should probably be converted to decimal form, because it's more natural to say "one and a half seconds" than it is to say "three-halves seconds". So I convert the last line above to the following:
0.5 ≤ t ≤ 1.5
Looking back at the original question, it did not ask for the value of the variable " t ", but asked for the times when the velocity was between certain values. So the actual answer is:
The velocity will be between 32 and 64 feet per second between 0.5 seconds after launch and 1.5 seconds after launch.
Okay; my answer above was *extremely* verbose and "complete"; you don't likely need to be so extreme. You can probably safely get away with saying something simpler like, "between 0.5 seconds and 1.5 seconds". Just make sure that you do indeed include the approprioate units (in this case, "seconds").
Always remember when doing word problems, that, once you've found the value for the variable, you need to go back and re-read the problem to make sure that you're answering the actual question. The inequality 0.5 ≤ t ≤ 1.5 did not answer the actual question regarding time. I had to interpret the inequality and express the values in terms of the original question.
First I'll multiply through on the right-hand side, and then solve as usual:
5 x + 7 < 3( x + 1)
5 x + 7 < 3 x + 3
2 x + 7 < 3
2 x < −4
x < −2
In solving this inequality, I divided through by a positive 2 to get the final answer; as a result (that is, because I did *not* divide through by a minus), I didn't have to flip the inequality sign.
First, I have to set up equations for this. The interest formula for simple interest is I = Prt , where I is the interest, P is the beginning principal, r is the interest rate expressed as a decimal, and t is the time in years.
Since no time-frame is specified for this problem, I'll assume that t = 1 ; that is, I'll assume (hope) that he's promising to pay me at the end of one year. I'll let x be the amount that I'm going to "invest" with my father. Then the rest of my money, being however much is left after whatever I give to him, will be represented by "the total, less what I've already given him", so 30000 − x will be left to invest in the safe account.
Then the interest on the business investment, assuming that I get paid back, will be:
I = ( x )(0.07)(1) = 0.07 x
The interest on the safe investment will be:
(30 000 − x )(0.05)(1) = 1500 − 0.05 x
The total interest is the sum of what is earned on each of the two separate investments, so my expression for the total interest is:
0.07 x + (1500 − 0.05 x ) = 0.02 x + 1500
I need to get at least $1900 ; that is, the sum of the two investments' interest must be greater than, or at least equal to, $1,900 . This allows me to create my inequality:
0.02 x + 1500 ≥ 1900
0.02 x ≥ 400
x ≥ 20 000
That is, I will need to "invest" at least $20,000 with my father in order to get $1,900 in interest income. Since I want to give him as little money as possible, I will give him the minimum amount:
I will invest $20,000 at 7% .
This is similar to a mixture word problem , except that this will involve inequality symbols rather than "equals" signs. I'll set it up the same way, though, starting with picking a variable for the unknown that I'm seeking. I will use x to stand for the pounds of 60% copper alloy that I need to use. Then 30 − x will be the number of pounds, out of total of thirty pounds needed, that will come from the 40% alloy.
Of course, I'll remember to convert the percentages to decimal form for doing the algebra.
pounds | % copper | pounds copper | |
---|---|---|---|
60% alloy | 0.6 | 0.6 | |
40% alloy | 30 − | 0.4 | 0.4(30 − ) = 12 − 0.4 |
mixture | 30 | between 0.46 and 0.5 | between 13.8 and 15 |
How did I get those values in the bottom right-hand box? I multiplied the total number of pounds in the mixture ( 30 ) by the minimum and maximum percentages ( 46% and 50% , respectively). That is, I multiplied across the bottom row, just as I did in the " 60% alloy" row and the " 40% alloy" row, to get the right-hand column's value.
The total amount of copper in the mixture will be the sum of the copper contributed by each of the two alloys that are being put into the mixture. So I'll add the expressions for the amount of copper from each of the alloys, and place the expression for the total amount of copper in the mixture as being between the minimum and the maximum allowable amounts of copper:
13.8 ≤ 0.6 x + (12 − 0.4 x ) ≤ 15
13.8 ≤ 0.2 x + 12 ≤ 15
1.8 ≤ 0.2 x ≤ 3
9 ≤ x ≤ 15
Checking back to my set-up, I see that I chose my variable to stand for the number of pounds that I need to use of the 60% copper alloy. And they'd only asked me for this amount, so I can ignore the other alloy in my answer.
I will need to use between 9 and 15 pounds of the 60% alloy.
Per yoozh, I'm verbose in my answer. You can answer simply as " between 9 and 15 pounds ".
First I'll multiply through and simplify; then I'll solve:
3( x − 2) + 4 ≥ 2(2 x − 3)
3 x − 6 + 4 ≥ 4 x − 6
3 x − 2 ≥ 4 x − 6
−2 ≥ x − 6 (*)
Why did I move the 3 x over to the right-hand side (to get to the line marked with a star), instead of moving the 4 x to the left-hand side? Because by moving the smaller term, I was able to avoid having a negative coefficient on the variable, and therefore I was able to avoid having to remember to flip the inequality when I divided through by that negative coefficient. I find it simpler to work this way; I make fewer errors. But it's just a matter of taste; you do what works for you.
Why did I switch the inequality in the last line and put the variable on the left? Because I'm more comfortable with inequalities when the answers are formatted this way. Again, it's only a matter of taste. The form of the answer in the previous line, 4 ≥ x , is perfectly acceptable.
As long as you remember to flip the inequality sign when you multiply or divide through by a negative, you shouldn't have any trouble with solving linear inequalities.
URL: https://www.purplemath.com/modules/ineqlin3.htm
Page 1 Page 2 Page 3
College math, homeschool math, share this page.
selected template will load here
This action is not available.
\( \newcommand{\vecs}[1]{\overset { \scriptstyle \rightharpoonup} {\mathbf{#1}} } \)
\( \newcommand{\vecd}[1]{\overset{-\!-\!\rightharpoonup}{\vphantom{a}\smash {#1}}} \)
\( \newcommand{\id}{\mathrm{id}}\) \( \newcommand{\Span}{\mathrm{span}}\)
( \newcommand{\kernel}{\mathrm{null}\,}\) \( \newcommand{\range}{\mathrm{range}\,}\)
\( \newcommand{\RealPart}{\mathrm{Re}}\) \( \newcommand{\ImaginaryPart}{\mathrm{Im}}\)
\( \newcommand{\Argument}{\mathrm{Arg}}\) \( \newcommand{\norm}[1]{\| #1 \|}\)
\( \newcommand{\inner}[2]{\langle #1, #2 \rangle}\)
\( \newcommand{\Span}{\mathrm{span}}\)
\( \newcommand{\id}{\mathrm{id}}\)
\( \newcommand{\kernel}{\mathrm{null}\,}\)
\( \newcommand{\range}{\mathrm{range}\,}\)
\( \newcommand{\RealPart}{\mathrm{Re}}\)
\( \newcommand{\ImaginaryPart}{\mathrm{Im}}\)
\( \newcommand{\Argument}{\mathrm{Arg}}\)
\( \newcommand{\norm}[1]{\| #1 \|}\)
\( \newcommand{\Span}{\mathrm{span}}\) \( \newcommand{\AA}{\unicode[.8,0]{x212B}}\)
\( \newcommand{\vectorA}[1]{\vec{#1}} % arrow\)
\( \newcommand{\vectorAt}[1]{\vec{\text{#1}}} % arrow\)
\( \newcommand{\vectorB}[1]{\overset { \scriptstyle \rightharpoonup} {\mathbf{#1}} } \)
\( \newcommand{\vectorC}[1]{\textbf{#1}} \)
\( \newcommand{\vectorD}[1]{\overrightarrow{#1}} \)
\( \newcommand{\vectorDt}[1]{\overrightarrow{\text{#1}}} \)
\( \newcommand{\vectE}[1]{\overset{-\!-\!\rightharpoonup}{\vphantom{a}\smash{\mathbf {#1}}}} \)
Sometimes there is a range of possible values to describe a situation. When you see a sign that says “Speed Limit 25,” you know that it doesn’t mean that you have to drive exactly at a speed of 25 miles per hour (mph). This sign means that you are not supposed to go faster than 25 mph, but there are many legal speeds you could drive, such as 22 mph, 24.5 mph or 19 mph. In a situation like this, which has more than one acceptable value, inequalities are used to represent the situation rather than equations .
An inequality is a mathematical statement that compares two expressions using an inequality sign. In an inequality, one expression of the inequality can be greater or less than the other expression. Special symbols are used in these statements. The box below shows the symbol, meaning, and an example for each inequality sign.
\(\ x \neq y \quad x \text{ is} {\bf\text { not equal }}\text{to } y\).
Example : The number of days in a week is not equal to 9.
\(\ x>y \quad x {\bf\text { is greater than }} y . \text { Example: } 6>3\)
Example : The number of days in a month is greater than the number of days in a week.
\(\ x<y \quad x {\bf\text { is less than }} y\)
Example : The number of days in a week is less than the number of days in a year.
\(\ x \geq y \quad x {\bf\text { is greater than or equal to }} y\)
Example : 31 is greater than or equal to the number of days in a month.
\(\ x \leq y \quad x {\bf\text { is less than or equal to }} y\)
Example : The speed of a car driving legally in a 25 mph zone is less than or equal to 25 mph.
The important thing about inequalities is that there can be multiple solutions. For example, the inequality “31 ≥ the number of days in a month” is a true statement for every month of the year—no month has more than 31 days. It holds true for January, which has 31 days (\(\ 31 \geq 31\)); September, which has 30 days (≥ 30); and February, which has either 28 or 29 days depending upon the year (\(\ 31 \geq 28 \text { and } 31 \geq 29\)).
The inequality \(\ x>y\) can also be written as \(\ y<x\). The sides of any inequality can be switched as long as the inequality symbol between them is also reversed.
Inequalities can be graphed on a number line. Below are three examples of inequalities and their graphs.
Each of these graphs begins with a circle—either an open or closed (shaded) circle. This point is often called the end point of the solution. A closed, or shaded, circle is used to represent the inequalities greater than or equal to (≥) or less than or equal to (≤) . The point is part of the solution. An open circle is used for greater than (>) or less than (<). The point is not part of the solution.
The graph then extends endlessly in one direction. This is shown by a line with an arrow at the end. For example, notice that for the graph of \(\ x \geq-3\) shown above, the end point is -3, represented with a closed circle since the inequality is greater than or equal to -3. The blue line is drawn to the right on the number line because the values in this area are greater than -3. The arrow at the end indicates that the solutions continue infinitely.
You can solve most inequalities using the same methods as those for solving equations. Inverse operations can be used to solve inequalities. This is because when you add or subtract the same value from both sides of an inequality, you have maintained the inequality. These properties are outlined in the blue box below.
\(\ \text { If } a>b, \text { then } a+c>b+c\)
\(\ \text { If } a>b, \text { then } a-c>b-c\)
Because inequalities have multiple possible solutions, representing the solutions graphically provides a helpful visual of the situation. The example below shows the steps to solve and graph an inequality.
Solve for \(\ x\).
\(\ x+3<5\)
\(\ \begin{array}{r} x+3<&5 \\ \ -3 \ \ \ \ &\ -3 \\ \hline x\ \ \ \ \ \ \ <&2 \end{array}\) | Isolate the variable by subtracting 3 from both sides of the inequality. |
\(\ x<2\)
The graph of the inequality \(\ x<2\) is shown below.
Just as you can check the solution to an equation, you can check a solution to an inequality. First, you check the end point by substituting it in the related equation. Then you check to see if the inequality is correct by substituting any other solution to see if it is one of the solutions. Because there are multiple solutions, it is a good practice to check more than one of the possible solutions. This can also help you check that your graph is correct.
The example below shows how you could check that \(\ x<2\) is the solution to \(\ x+3<5\).
Check that \(\ x<2\) is the solution to \(\ x+3<5\).
\(\ \begin{aligned} x+3 &=5 \\ \text { Does } 2+3 &=5 ? \\ 5 &=5 \end{aligned}\) | Substitute the end point 2 into the related equation, \(\ x+3=5\). |
\(\ \begin{aligned} It checks! | Pick a value less than 2, such as 0, to check into the inequality. (This value will be on the shaded part of the graph.) |
\(\ x<2\) is the solution to \(\ x+3<5\)
The following examples show additional inequality problems. The graph of the solution to the inequality is also shown. Remember to check the solution. This is a good habit to build!
\(\ \frac{15}{2}+x>-\frac{37}{4}\)
\(\ \begin{array}{r} \frac{15}{2}-\frac{15}{2}+x-\frac{37}{4}-\frac{15}{2} \\ x>-\frac{37}{4}-\frac{15}{2} \\ x>-\frac{37}{4}-\frac{30}{4} \\ x>-\frac{67}{4} \end{array}\) | Subtract \(\ \frac{15}{2}\) from both sides to isolate the variable. |
\(\ x>-\frac{67}{4}\)
\(\ x-10 \leq-12\)
\(\ \begin{array}{r} x-10 \leq&\ -12 \\ \ +10 \ \ \ \ &\ +10 \\ \hline x\ \ \ \ \ \ \ \ \ \leq&\ -2 \end{array}\) | Isolate the variable by adding 10 to both sides of the inequality. |
\(\ x \leq-2\)
The graph of this solution in shown below. Notice that a closed circle is used because the inequality is “less than or equal to” (≤). The blue arrow is drawn to the left of the point -2 because these are the values that are less than -2.
Check that \(\ x \leq-2\) is the solution to \(\ x-10 \leq-12\).
\(\ \begin{aligned} x-10 &=-12 \\ \text { Does }-2-10 &=-12 ? \\ -12 &=-12 \end{aligned}\) | Substitute the end point -2 into the related equation \(\ x-10=-12\). |
\(\ \text { Is } \begin{aligned} It checks! | Pick a value less than -2, such as -5, to check in the inequality. (This value will be on the shaded part of the graph.) |
\(\ x \leq-2\) is the solution to \(\ x-10 \leq 12\).
Solve for \(\ a\).
\(\ a-17>-17\)
\(\ \begin{array}{r} a-17>&\ -17 \\ \ +17\ \ \ \ &\ +17 \\ \hline a \ \ \ \ \ \ \ \ \ >&0 \end{array}\) | Isolate the variable by adding 17 to both sides of the inequality. |
\(\ a>0\)
The graph of this solution in shown below. Notice that an open circle is used because the inequality is “greater than” (>). The arrow is drawn to the right of 0 because these are the values that are greater than 0.
Check that \(\ a>0\) is the solution to
\(\ a-17>-17\).
\(\ \begin{aligned} a-17 &=-17 \\ \text { Does } 0-17 &=-17 ? \\ -17&=-17 \end{aligned}\) | Substitute the end point, 0, into the related equation. |
\(\ \begin{aligned} It checks! | Pick a value greater than 0, such as 20, to check in the inequality. (This value will be on the shaded part of the graph.) |
\(\ a>0\) is the solution to \(\ a-17>-17\).
Solve for \(\ x\): \(\ 0.5 x \leq 7-0.5 x\).
Solving an inequality with a variable that has a coefficient other than 1 usually involves multiplication or division. The steps are like solving one-step equations involving multiplication or division EXCEPT for the inequality sign. Let’s look at what happens to the inequality when you multiply or divide each side by the same number.
Let’s start with the true statement: | \(\ 10>5\) | Let’s try again by starting with the same true statement: | \(\ 10>5\) |
Next, multiply both sides by the same positive number: | \(\ 10 \cdot 2>5 \cdot 2\) | This time, multiply both sides by the same negative number: | \(\ 10 \cdot-2>5 \cdot-2\) |
20 is greater than 10, so you still have a true inequality: | \(\ 20>10\) | Wait a minute! -20 is greater than -10, so you have an untrue statement. | \(\ -20>-10\) |
When you multiply by a positive number, leave the inequality sign as it is! | You must “reverse” the inequality sign to make the statement true: | \(\ -20<-10\) |
When you multiply by a negative number, “reverse” the inequality sign.
Whenever you multiply or divide both sides of an inequality by a negative number, the inequality sign must be reversed in order to keep a true statement.
These rules are summarized in the box below.
\(\ \begin{aligned} \text { If } a>b \text { , then } a c>b c \text { , if } c>0\\ \text { If } a>b \text { , then } a c<b c \text { , if } c<0\\ \\ \text { If } a>b \text { , then } \frac{a}{c}>\frac{b}{c} \text { , if } c>0\\ \text { If } a>b \text { , then } \frac{a}{c}<\frac{b}{c} \text { , if } c<0 \end{aligned}\)
Keep in mind that you only change the sign when you are multiplying and dividing by a negative number. If you add or subtract a negative number, the inequality stays the same.
\(\ -\frac{1}{3}>-12 x\)
\(\ \begin{aligned} -\frac{1}{3} \div-12&<-12 x \div-12 \\ -\frac{1}{3} \cdot-\frac{1}{12}&<\frac{-12 x}{-12} \\ \frac{1}{36}&<x \end{aligned}\) | Divide both sides by -12 to isolate the variable. Since you are dividing by a negative number, you need to change the direction of the inequality sign. |
Check \(\ \begin{aligned}\text { Does } | Check your solution by first checking the end point, \(\ \frac{1}{36}\), in the related equation. |
\(\ \begin{aligned} It checks! | Pick a value greater than \(\ \frac{1}{36}\), such as 2, to check in the inequality. |
\(\ x>\frac{1}{36}\)
\(\ 3 x>12\)
\(\ \begin{aligned} \frac{3 x}{3} &>\frac{12}{3} \\ & x>4 \end{aligned}\) | Divide both sides by 3 to isolate the variable. |
Check \(\ \begin{aligned} \(\ \begin{aligned} | Check your solution by first checking the end point, 4, and then checking another solution for the inequality. |
\(\ x>4\)
The graph of this solution is shown below.
There was no need to make any changes to the inequality sign because both sides of the inequality were divided by positive 3. In the next example, there is division by a negative number, so there is an additional step in the solution!
\(\ -2 x>6\)
\(\ \frac{-2 x}{-2}<\frac{6}{-2}\) \(\ x<-3\) | Divide each side of the inequality by -2 to isolate the variable, and change the direction of the inequality sign because of the division by a negative number. |
Check: \(\ \begin{aligned}\text { Does } It checks! | Check your solution by first checking the end point, -3, and then checking another solution for the inequality. |
\(\ x<-3\)
Because both sides of the inequality were divided by a negative number, -2, the inequality symbol was switched from > to <. The graph of this solution is shown below.
Solve for \(\ y\): \(\ -10 y \geq 150\)
Solve for \(\ a\): \(\ -\frac{a}{5}<\frac{35}{8}\)
Solving inequalities is very similar to solving equations, except you have to reverse the inequality symbols when you multiply or divide both sides of an inequality by a negative number. Since inequalities can have multiple solutions, it is customary to represent the solution to an inequality graphically as well as algebraically. Because there is usually more than one solution to an inequality, when you check your answer you should check the end point and one other value to check the direction of the inequality.
Enter the inequality below which you want to simplify.
The inequality calculator simplifies the given inequality. You will get the final answer in inequality form and interval notation.
Click the blue arrow to submit. Choose "Simplify" from the topic selector and click to see the result in our Algebra Calculator!
Solve for x 3 - 2 ( 1 - x ) ≤ 2 Solve for x 5 + 5 ( x + 4 ) ≤ 2 0 Solve for x 4 - 3 ( 1 - x ) ≤ 3 Solve for x - x - x + 7 ( x - 2 ) Solve for x 8 x ≤ - 3 2
Please ensure that your password is at least 8 characters and contains each of the following:
IXL offers hundreds of seventh grade math skills to explore and learn! Not sure where to start? Go to your personalized Recommendations wall to find a skill that looks interesting, or select a skill plan that aligns to your textbook, state standards, or standardized test.
These lessons help you brush up on important math topics and prepare you to dive into skill practice!
Summer and Fall classes are open for enrollment. Schedule today !
Something appears to not have loaded correctly.
Click to refresh .
It is currently 22 Jun 2024, 04:17 |
Customized for You
Track Your Progress
Practice Pays
Practice thousands of GMAT questions with top expert solutions.
Identify and improve upon mistakes efficiently using our Error Log.
Get the latest tips and news from our top GMAT professionals.
- it’s free and easy!
Thank you for using the timer! We noticed you are actually not timing your practice. Click the START button first next time you use the timer. There are many benefits to timing your practice , including:
We’ll give you an estimate of your score
We’ll provide personalized question recommendations
Your score will improve and your results will be more realistic
How to Tackle Main Point Questions on GMAT RC? (Free Webinar)
IITian's GMAT Journey with Self Preparation
GMAT RC Masterclass
Celebrating 700+ Reviews on GMAT Club
Leverage the GMAT Focus Algorithm to Your Advantage (Free Webinar)
GRE Practice Quiz (June 23rd) - Quant, Data Analysis, Text Completion, Sentence Equivalence
Ace Arithmetic on the GMAT Focus Edition
GMAT 805 Journey with Target Test Pre
Profile Evaluation and Enrichment
05:30 AM PDT
07:30 AM PDT
08:30 AM PDT
11:00 AM IST
01:00 PM IST
12:00 PM EDT
01:00 PM EDT
06:30 AM PDT
02:00 PM EDT
03:00 PM PDT
04:00 PM PDT
Gmat question banks.
Difficulty:
Question Stats:
Forum Home
|
--> --> Prep Toolkit Announcements Saturday, June 22, 2024 10:30am NY / 2:30pm London / 8pm Mumbai Also Watch.... Stories that will Inspire You to Reach Your GMAT Goal. --> --> With a particular emphasis on generative AI, the new courses span ground-breaking topics and timely challenges facing business and leaders today. --> --> --> Latest Posts |
The post is bookmarked successfully
South Africa's future depends on an 'unholy alliance' solving its real-world problems before time runs out
From Constantia Nek, a pass across the spine of rugged mountain that runs all the way to the Cape of Good Hope, day trippers are afforded a stunning view across centuries-old vineyards all the way to Cape Town's city centre.
A quick jaunt down the other side past Michelin-star restaurants and gated housing estates leads to Hout Bay, a thriving fishing port on the city's Atlantic coast.
There, butted up against architect-designed trophy houses, sits Imizamu Yethu, an 18-hectare "informal settlement" of mostly corrugated iron shacks that is home to almost 35,000 residents.
The contrast couldn't be more incongruous. But it is a stark illustration of the unachieved ambitions and dashed hopes that accompanied the end of apartheid 30 years ago and stands as a monument to the failure of the African National Congress (ANC) to deliver meaningful change after three decades of uninterrupted rule.
It's not an isolated case.
Right across the country, townships have sprung up and existing ones have expanded as African workers have flooded into urban and regional centres, graphically hammering home the message that while forced racial segregation may have ended, wealth still is largely delineated along racial lines.
The rich, most of whom are white, live very, very well. The rest struggle to eat regularly.
A fortnight ago, the ANC's iron grip on power was smashed, an idea once considered unthinkable. For decades, it was considered that democracy played out through the party framework rather than through the electoral process.
But the country's crumbling infrastructure, endless revelations of corruption at the highest levels and an inability to deliver basic services saw the ANC garner just 42 per cent of the national vote.
After a fortnight of post-poll haggling, the ANC late last week announced a coalition with the Democratic Alliance (DA), which it has long accused of pandering to the interests of white South Africans, and two minor parties.
Under the deal, Cyril Ramaphosa will remain as president with the DA nominating the deputy.
In reality, the ANC had little choice. Financial markets were rattled by the prospect of the alternative; an alliance with the two major left-wing parties which advocate the resumption of mines and land without compensation.
The DA, supported by white and mixed-race South Africans, has long controlled the Western Cape province that includes Cape Town and has a far better track record on service delivery than its rivals in other provinces.
For many voters, it was the outcome for which they were hoping; a coalition government held to greater accountability.
There aren't too many statistics that put South Africa in a competitive global position.
But crime is one. Cape Town slots in at 10th place when it comes to murders, with Mexican cities occupying seven of the top nine.
Then there's unemployment. At 40 per cent, and with a social security net that offers minimal support, many South Africans have little option but to resort to crime simply to put food on the table.
Most suburban houses now hide behind high walls with barbed wire and electric fencing, festooned with placards denoting which armed response company has been contracted for protection.
While many would point to these developments as a sign of a deteriorating society, in reality, there has been little change in the past 30 years.
The main point of difference is that crime is now more visible. During the apartheid era, Africans were prohibited from moving beyond designated areas, controlled by a violent regime determined to brutally suppress any form of opposition.
More heartening was that the recent elections were unhindered by any major incidents, apart from long lines at polling stations, and campaigning largely was peaceful. Even the results largely were accepted until last week when former president Jacob Zuma claimed the elections were rigged.
Uncertainty over the results, however, temporarily dented international confidence in the currency which has been on the slide for decades.
On my first visit almost 40 years ago, I was stunned to discover the rand had slumped from parity with the Aussie and was delivering two rand to the dollar. Last week, it was yielding just shy of 13 rand.
Former finance minister and once senior ANC official Trevor Manuel, now the chair of investment group Old Mutual, argues global investors have dumped about 1 trillion rand worth of South African shares in the past decade.
"This money is being redirected to competing markets that appear to be on a more sound governance and regulatory footing," he wrote in this year's annual report.
A vocal critic of the government in recent years, Manuel has frequently lashed out about rising corruption that has seen vast amounts of taxpayer funds squandered.
Former president Jacob Zuma loomed large over the most recent polls.
The octogenarian, who regularly has pleaded ill health during the many court proceedings against him, assumed a leading role in the relatively new MK Party.
Having been previously jailed for contempt, his status as a future politician is under a cloud. And he continues to fight multiple corruption allegations including taking bribes from French group Thales in 2000 over a defence contract.
Even his surprise elevation to lead the MK Party has been subject to legal action from the former leader who claims Zuma's daughter penned his "resignation letter".
Despite that, the MK Party did surprisingly well, garnering 14.6 per cent of the vote, and it has joined forces with the Economic Freedom Fighters as the official opposition with almost 30 per cent of seats in the National Assembly.
As breakaways from the ANC, they are largely responsible for the collapse in support for the party that has dominated South African politics for the past 30 years. But both are now wedded to a policy of forced resumption of assets, including mines and farms.
Adding to the disquiet, Zuma's party last week launched proceedings in the country's highest court, alleging vote rigging, a claim the court quickly dismissed.
Over the weekend, the former president lashed out against the ANC liaison with the DA, labelling it a "white-led", "unholy alliance".
Zuma and Ramaphosa are archenemies. The former president managed to strike a blow against Ramaphosa four years ago after it was revealed that two thieves had broken into his farmhouse and stolen $US580,000 ($870,000) in cash that had been stuffed into a sofa .
Exactly why the money was there has never been explained but Ramaphosa came close to losing his position over the scandal.
On Sunday, Zuma raised the spectre of the age-old fight against white colonialism and apartheid in his attack on the ANC and his successor Ramaphosa.
The new Patriotic Front would operate both within and outside parliament, his spokesman said, reading from a prepared statement, where he placed his nemesis alongside the apartheid-era Afrikaner leaders.
It may be a clever domestic political ploy but threats to seize property will do little to instil confidence in the country's ability to compete globally. Further deterioration of the currency will only exacerbate the extreme cost-of-living pressures facing South African households and businesses.
It also ignores history. The DA's forebears once were labelled left wing for their efforts to overthrow apartheid.
Ultimately, however, dissatisfaction and unrest within the electorate have been fuelled by the abject failure to provide even basic services, much of which occurred during Zuma's decade-long presidency.
Delivery of new housing, education and jobs fell well short of promises. And the country's crumbling infrastructure has seen crippling power shortages during the past year as aging, coal-fired generators have been shut but not replaced.
Oddly, the "load shedding", which was really blackouts, stopped shortly before the election was announced.
For a country with so much promise and natural bounty, so culturally rich and diverse, time is running short to find solutions to real-world problems.
Otherwise, South Africa may well become another textbook case on what happens when inequality is allowed to fester.
The three-body problem is a physics conundrum that has boggled scientists since Isaac Newton's day. But what is it, why is it so hard to solve and is the sci-fi series of the same name really possible?
A rocket launch. Our nearest stellar neighbor. A Netflix show. All of these things have something in common: They must contend with the "three-body problem." But exactly what is this thorny physics conundrum?
The three-body problem describes a system containing three bodies that exert gravitational forces on one another. While it may sound simple, it's a notoriously tricky problem and "the first real worry of Newton," Billy Quarles , a planetary dynamicist at Valdosta State University in Georgia, told Live Science.
In a system of only two bodies, like a planet and a star, calculating how they'll move around each other is fairly straightforward: Most of the time, those two objects will orbit roughly in a circle around their center of mass, and they'll come back to where they started each time. But add a third body, like another star, and things get a lot more complicated. The third body attracts the two orbiting each other, pulling them out of their predictable paths .
The motion of the three bodies depends on their starting state — their positions, velocities and masses. If even one of those variables changes, the resulting motion could be completely different.
"I think of it as if you're walking on a mountain ridge," Shane Ross , an applied mathematician at Virginia Tech, told Live Science. "With one small change, you could either fall to the right or you could fall to the left. Those are two very close initial positions, and they could lead to very different states."
There aren't enough constraints on the motions of the bodies to solve the three-body problem with equations, Ross said.
Related: Cosmic 'superbubbles' might be throwing entire galaxies into chaos, theoretical study hints
Get the world’s most fascinating discoveries delivered straight to your inbox.
But some solutions to the three-body problem have been found. For example, if the starting conditions are just right, three bodies of equal mass could chase one another in a figure-eight pattern. Such tidy solutions are the exception, however, when it comes to real systems in space.
Certain conditions can make the three-body problem easier to parse. Consider Tatooine , Luke Skywalker's fictional home world from "Star Wars" — a single planet orbiting two suns. Those two stars and the planet make up a three-body system. But if the planet is far enough away and orbiting both stars together, it's possible to simplify the problem.
"When it's the Tatooine case, as long as you're far enough away from the central binary, then you think of this object as just being a really fat star," Quarles said. The planet doesn't exert much force on the stars because it's so much less massive, so the system becomes similar to the more easily solvable two-body problem. So far, scientists have found more than a dozen Tatooine-like exoplanets , Quarles told Live Science.
But often, the orbits of the three bodies never truly stabilize, and the three-body problem gets "solved" with a bang. The gravitational forces could cause two of the three bodies to collide, or they could fling one of the bodies out of the system forever — a possible source of "rogue planets" that don't orbit any star , Quarles said. In fact, three-body chaos may be so common in space that scientists estimate there may be 20 times as many rogue planets as there are stars in our galaxy.
When all else fails, scientists can use computers to approximate the motions of bodies in an individual three-body system. That makes it possible to predict the motion of a rocket launched into orbit around Earth, or to predict the fate of a planet in a system with multiple stars.
— 'Mathematically perfect' star system being investigated for potential alien technology
— How common are Tatooine worlds?
— Mathematicians find 12,000 new solutions to 'unsolvable' 3-body problem
With all this tumult, you might wonder if anything could survive on a planet like the one featured in Netflix's "3 Body Problem," which — spoiler alert — is trapped in a chaotic orbit around three stars in the Alpha Centauri system , our solar system 's nearest neighbor.
"I don't think in that type of situation, that's a stable environment for life to evolve," Ross said. That's one aspect of the show that remains firmly in the realm of science fiction.
Skyler Ware is a freelance science journalist covering chemistry, biology, paleontology and Earth science. She was a 2023 AAAS Mass Media Science and Engineering Fellow at Science News. Her work has also appeared in Science News Explores, ZME Science and Chembites, among others. Skyler has a Ph.D. in chemistry from Caltech.
'Immortal' stars at the Milky Way's center may have found an endless energy source, study suggests
Earth's upper atmosphere could hold a missing piece of the universe, new study hints
'Loch ness monster' microbe stretches its neck to 30 times its body length in seconds
Advertisement
The trump rallying cry that’s also a math problem.
His supporters can’t quite agree on whether to call him the 45th president or the 47th president.
By Jess Bidgood
Donald Trump and his supporters can’t quite seem to agree: Should he be labeled the 45th president, the 47th president or both?
As he takes the stage at rallies, he is sometimes introduced with both titles, making it almost sound as if he were two different people.
Last Friday, he was treated to a birthday celebration in West Palm Beach, Fla., by a group of supporters called Club 47 USA — which used to be called Club 45 USA, but changed its name. The group’s website, however, is still club45usa.com .
And the day before, Republican senators regaled him with a birthday cake containing two sets of numbered candles — a 45 and a 47. (According to a video posted on social media by one of his campaign accounts, only the 45 appeared to be lit when Trump received the cake.)
Trump was, of course, the country’s 45th president, and now might become its 47th — a number he has plastered all over his campaign’s infrastructure, including the name of his joint fund-raising committee, a URL for his fund-raising website and his grass-roots organizing program.
There may well be a strategy at play here. Trump has not been elected the 47th president, and his embrace of the figure came well before it was even clear that he would be his party’s nominee — making it an attempt to burnish the air of inevitability he often tries to project.
We are having trouble retrieving the article content.
Please enable JavaScript in your browser settings.
Thank you for your patience while we verify access. If you are in Reader mode please exit and log into your Times account, or subscribe for all of The Times.
Thank you for your patience while we verify access.
Already a subscriber? Log in .
Want all of The Times? Subscribe .
A conversation with Harvard Business School professor Frances Frei on how to solve any problem in five clear steps.
You’ve likely heard the phrase, “Move fast and break things.” But Harvard Business School professor Frances Frei says speed and experimentation are not enough on their own. Instead, she argues that you should move fast and fix things. (That’s also the topic and title of the book she coauthored with Anne Morriss .)
In this episode, Frei explains how you can solve any problem in five clear steps. First, she says, start by identifying the real problem holding you back. Then move on to building trust and relationships, followed by a narrative for your solution — before you begin implementing it.
Key episode topics include: leadership, strategy execution, managing people, collaboration and teams, trustworthiness, organizational culture.
HBR On Leadership curates the best case studies and conversations with the world’s top business and management experts, to help you unlock the best in those around you. New episodes every week.
HANNAH BATES: Welcome to HBR on Leadership , case studies and conversations with the world’s top business and management experts, hand-selected to help you unlock the best in those around you.
Maybe you’ve heard the phrase, “move fast and break things.” It refers to a certain approach for rapid innovation that was popularized in Silicon Valley and invoked by many tech firms. But Harvard Business School professor Frances Frei says that speed and experimentation are not enough on their own. Instead, Frei argues that you should “move fast and fix things.” That’s the topic and title of the book she co-authored with Anne Morriss.
In this episode, Harvard Business Review’s editorial audience director Nicole Smith sits down with Frei to discuss how you can solve any problem in five quick steps. You’ll learn how to start by uncovering your true problem. Then, move on to build trust, relationships, and a narrative for your solution before you dive in on the actual work of implementing your fix.
This conversation was originally part of HBR’s “Future of Business” virtual conference in November 2023. Here it is.
FRANCES FREI: So, I would love to talk to you about how to move fast and fix things. And I’ll tell you the reason that Anne and I wrote this book – and it’s really a quest we’ve been on – is that Mark Zuckerberg, in his IPO for Facebook, famously said, “we’re going to move fast and break things.” And the problem with that is that it gave the world a false trade-off. It convinced so many of us that you could either move fast and break things or you could take care of people, one or the other. And we have found that there is a third, much better way. And that is, we can move even faster if we fix things along the way. And so, that’s what I’d love to talk to you about right now. And the way that we think about this is that if you want to move fast and fix things, we have to do it on a foundation of trust. And so, the first thing to do is to experience high trust. And we’re going to talk about how to build trust. But the way we see the world can be described in this grid. And in the presence of trust, we can move really fast. That’s how we move fast and fix things. We call it accelerating excellence. It’s only when we’re in the presence of low trust that we move fast and break things, or what we call being reckless disruption. And as I said, so many organizations are afraid of reckless disruption that they actually end up in this state of responsible stewardship, which is really just going slowly. And so, we wrote the book to get those that are in responsible stewardship to realize that we could go across the way to accelerating excellence. And we didn’t have to go down to reckless disruption. So, the way that we think about this, and it’s the way we wrote the book, is that there’s a five-step plan to do it. We organized the book for days of the week. We think that the metabolic rate of organizations can be improved significantly and that many, many hard problems can be solved in just one week. So, we wrote the book in the structure of a week. Step one is we have to find our real problem, that if we’re… for far too many of us, we’re addressing the symptom and not the cause. At any problem, there’s going to be trust broken at the bottom of it. And we’re going to solve for trust. We’re then going to learn how to get more perspectives to make our plans even better. Learn how to tell a narrative that works. And then, and only then, on Friday, do we get to go as fast as we can. And what typically happens in the move fast and break things is that we move Friday too forward in the week. So, our goal is to put ourselves in a position to move fast. And you have to wait till Friday to do that. So, what do I mean by finding the real problem? Most of us, a problem gets presented as a symptom. So, I’ll give you a recent example that got presented to me and Anne. We got called by a company. And they said, we’re having a gender problem. Will you come in and help us? And we’ve been able to help many organizations solve gender problems. So, we go in there. And we just wanted to make sure that they really did have a gender problem. The symptoms were super clear. There were no women at the top of the organization. Not very many women were coming into the organization. And great women were leaving the organization. So, they had… it looked like a gender problem. But it took, I don’t know, an hour. It took 60 minutes, certainly not even all of Monday, to uncover that their actual problem was not a gender problem. Their actual problem was a communication problem. And if we did all of the things that we know exist in our gender tool kit on how to fix gender, that would have all been wasted effort. But instead, what we found out is that the founders of this organization, and they were two cofounders, and they were very similar to each other, and they’d worked together and known each other for decades. They had a really uncomfortably and aggressively direct communication style. That communication style repelled all women and most men. So yes, the symptoms were gender. But oh, my goodness, the cause was that the two founders were succumbing to a problem many of us succumb to, which is, we were treating others as we like to be treated. They loved to be treated with aggressively direct communication. But nobody else loved it. And when we simply confronted them with that and taught them that instead of treating others as you want to be treated, now it’s a puzzle. Find out how they want to be treated, and treat them that way. Gets fixed. And all of a sudden, women and lots of other men are flowing to the organization. So, Monday… and we take a whole day for this. Let’s make sure we’re solving the real problem. And symptoms are rarely the cause. So, we just want to do some due diligence, some due diligence there. Once we know we’re solving for the real problem, there’s going to be trust broken down somewhere in the… amidst the problem. Well, very fortunately, we now understand trust super well. If I’m going to earn your trust, you will have an involuntary reaction of trusting me if you experience my authenticity, logic, and empathy all at the same time. When these three things are present, you will trust me. But if any one of these three is missing, you will not trust me. And here’s the catch. If trust is broken, and we know it’s only ever broken for one of these three reasons, we need to know which of the three, because the prescriptions to solve a broken authenticity pillar versus logic pillar versus empathy pillar, they’re entirely different from one another. So, you can think about rebuilding trust. It’s just a matching game. Know which one is at stake. And then bring in the curated prescription for that. There is a myth about trust that it takes a lifetime to build and a moment to destroy. And then you can never rebuild it. None of those things are true, that we can actually build trust very quickly when we understand the architecture of it. We can rebuild it quickly and just as strong as it was before. So, this notion that trust is a Faberge egg, it’s catchy and not true. Trust is being rebuilt all the time. But we want to do it with a deep understanding of the stable architecture. So, Tuesday takes all day. We solve for trust. On Wednesday, we call Wednesday making new friends. And what we mean by that is whichever collection of people you bring to the table who are the people that maybe are on your senior team or the people that you bring to the table to solve problems. And here, I’ve represented a table. And there’s eight check marks for eight seats. I encourage you to bring four extra chairs to that table. If you have eight seats, bring four extra chairs. Point to the extra chairs and ask yourself, who’s not here? Who has a stake in our problem who’s not represented at the table? I was recently in a conversation with our senior colleagues at the Harvard Business School. And we were talking about how to do junior faculty development. And we came up with what we thought were great ideas. And then we looked around and we were like, Oh, my goodness, there’s no junior faculty here. How on Earth do we know if these are good ideas? So, we got the empty seats. We invited people in. And sure enough, the junior faculty helped improve our plans dramatically. The equivalent of that always happens. So, on Wednesday, we want to make new friends. So, one is inviting them into the room. But then the second part is, how do you make sure that their voices are heard? And what we need to do is that when someone comes to the room, they’re going to be awfully tempted to say things that they think we want to hear. They’re going to be awfully tempted to conform to what we’re already saying. So, what we need to do is learn how to be inclusive of their unique voices. And the way we do that is by going through this four-step progressive process, which is, first, we have to make sure they feel safe and that they feel… they’re going to feel physically and emotionally safe, I’m sure, but that they feel psychologically safe. And that’s a shout-out to Amy Edmondson and all of her beautiful work there. But we have to make sure that we feel safe. Once we feel safe, then it’s our job to make sure that the new voices feel welcome. You can think of that as table stakes. Then when we’re doing is we’re really trying to move people up the inclusion dial. And here, this is when it really starts to make a big difference. And now what we want to do is make sure that they feel celebrated for their unique contribution. And so, what we’re doing is moving them up the inclusion dial. Now, here’s why that’s kind of hard. Most of us tend to celebrate sameness. And here, I’m asking you to celebrate uniqueness. And what I mean by celebrating sameness is that for the most part, like, when I watch my students in class, if one student says something, and then another student was going to say that, after class, they go and seek out the first person. And they’re like, you’re awesome. You said what I was going to say. They didn’t realize this. They’re celebrating sameness. They’re encouraging sameness. So, what I do is I advise my students to not share that verbal treat, that what we playfully refer to as a Scooby snack. Don’t share that Scooby snack for when somebody says something you were going to say. Share it for when somebody says something you could never have said on your own, and that it comes from their lived experience and learned experience, and how they metabolize successes and failures, and their ambition, if they’re lucky enough to have neurodiversity, their worldview, all of that. It’s a beautiful cocktail. Wait till they say something that comes uniquely from all of that. Celebrate that. When we celebrate uniqueness, that’s when we get the blossoming of the perspectives. And what we want to do to make somebody really feel included is we celebrate them when they are in our presence. But if you really want somebody to feel included, and we bring folks into the room for this, make sure that you champion them when they’re in the absence. So, let’s not just ask the junior faculty to come along. Or if it’s a senior team, and it’s mostly men, and the board of directors is coming in, and we’re like, oh, goodness. Let’s make sure we can show some women too. So, we bring some women along. We celebrate them in our presence. Let’s make sure that we champion them in our absence as well, which is celebrate their uniqueness in our presence and champion them in rooms that they’re not yet allowed into in their absence. So that’s Wednesday. Let’s make new friends. Let’s include their voices. Let’s champion those new voices in their absence. Thursday, we tell a good story. And stories have three parts to it: past, present, and future. It is really important – if you’re going to change something, if you’re going to fix something, it is critical to honor the past. People that were here before us, if they don’t feel like we see the past, we see them, we’re honoring the past, I promise you, they’re going to hold us back. And they’re going to be like The Godfather movie and keep pulling us back. So, we have to honor the past with clear eyes, both the good part of the past and the bad part of the past. Then we have to answer the question, why should we change now? Like, why shouldn’t we change maybe next week, maybe the week after, maybe the month after, maybe next year? So, it’s really important that we give a clear and compelling change mandate that answers the question, why now? Why not in a little while? I find that if you’re a retailer, and you have the metaphor of Walmart just opened up next door, clear, compelling. We have to… that should be our metaphor. How can we be, with as crisp of a language, clear and compelling about why now? And then we’ve honored the past. We have a clear and compelling change mandate. You want people to follow us in the improved future, we have to have a super rigorous and a super optimistic way forward. We have seen so many people be optimistic without rigor. Nobody’s going to follow. And similarly, rigor without optimism, also, nobody’s going to follow. So, it’s our job to keep refining and refining and refining until we can be both rigorous and optimistic. Now, how do we know when our plan is working? Well, here are the four parts of storytelling that we know. Our job is to understand this plan so deeply that we can describe it simply. When we describe it, we want to make sure if I describe it to you, and you describe it to the next person, that the next person understands it as if I described it to them. So, our job is to understand so deeply that we can describe simply that it’s understood in our absence. And the ultimate test is it’s understood when they go home and share it with their family. They have the same understanding we want. We find this to be the four-stage litmus test to make sure we have been effective in our communication. And when people understand it this well, then they can act on it in our absence. And that’s when we’re now in the position to go as fast as we can. And when all of that infrastructure is in place, well, then we can go super fast. And there are all kinds of clever ways that we can do that. So, I look forward to opening this up and having a conversation with you.
NICOLE SMITH: That was excellent. Professor, we got several questions. I want to just dive right into it. Tessa asked, what tools, practices, and skills do you use to uncover the underlying superficial problems? It sounded like you talked a lot about questions and asking questions.
FRANCES FREI: Yeah, it’s right. So, the Toyota production system would famously refer to the five whys. And they had… and that was root cause analysis, which we all know. But essentially, what they found is that it’s about five… why does this exist? Well, why does that exist? Well, why does that exist? Like, if you ask why five times, they found that that’s how you got to the root cause. We find, in practice, the answer is closer to three. It’s rarely one. So, it would be, the symptom and the cause are usually a few layers. And you want to keep asking why. So, that’s the first thing I would say, is that we want to have… make sure that you’re doing root cause analysis. But the second thing on a specific tool, the tool that we like the most, we call the indignities list. And what you do is that… and the way we found out the symptom is we went to women in this company, because that’s what… they said they were having a gender problem. And we asked the women, is there anything that’s going on at work that just… it feels like it’s just nicking your dignity? And it occurs for… is it happening to you, or you observe it happening to other women? So, you go in search of the indignities list. Every time we do this, you’ll get a list of issues. Often, they will sound trivial. When you start to get convergence on those indignities, we then ask you to convert those indignities to the dignity list. And in this case, it was the communication style. And you know what the awesome thing about that was? It was free.
NICOLE SMITH: Wow.
FRANCES FREI: You can’t beat free.
NICOLE SMITH: Monique asks, can you speak more about how to amplify others’ ideas and perspectives, especially when they’re from underrepresented stakeholders?
FRANCES FREI: Oh, I love that question. Thank you very much. And so, I’m going to go to… here is my favorite visual on the amplification part, which is the team I’ve drawn in the middle, it’s a three-person team. And each circle represents a person on the team. And I’m showing that there’s three circles in the middle, that those folks are very similar to one another. And then on either side, we have a team where there’s difference among us. And this is where the underrepresented might come in. If we’re not careful, when we have underrepresented voices, we’re only going to be seeking from them the parts that overlap with us. So, this is when we’ve invited them to the table, but we’re not inclusive of their voices. What we want to do is make sure that everybody feels comfortable bringing all of their richness to the table, not just the part that overlaps. And so, what we find we need to do is be very solicitous about… and same with questions. From your perspective, how does this sound to you? What else are we missing? What I’m trying to do is get you off the scent of saying what you think I want to say or even asking you to say what I want to say because it makes me feel better. But I want to be inclusive of all of the gorgeous uniqueness. And this, of course, ties to diversity, equity, and inclusion, which I know has gotten a rocky go of things in the press. But what I’ll tell you is, if I got to rewrite diversity, equity, and inclusion, I would have written it as inclusion, equity, and diversity, because I have seen teams bring… I have seen organizations bring in diverse and underrepresented talent and not get the benefit from it.
NICOLE SMITH: Yeah.
FRANCES FREI: So, diversity may or may not beget inclusion. But I have never, ever seen an organization that was inclusive that didn’t beget gorgeous diversity.
NICOLE SMITH: Right.
FRANCES FREI: So, be inclusive first.
NICOLE SMITH: I appreciate you saying that, not just sitting at the table, but actually including and giving lift to people’s voices. I also want to talk about this friends thing you keep talking about, making new friends. First of all, how do I identify who’s a friend?
FRANCES FREI: Yeah. So, in this case, I want the friend to be someone who is as different from you as possible. So, the new friends. Like, who’s worthy of friendship? Not someone who you’re already attracted to, not somebody who you’re already hanging out with. So, here’s the thing about humans. We really like people who are really like us. It doesn’t make us bad people. But it just makes us human. And so, what I want you to do is seek difference. Find people from different perspectives. And that will be demographic difference, different lived experience, different learned experience. And so, if we’re senior faculty, let’s invite in junior faculty. If we’re all women, let’s invite in a man. If we’re all engineers, let’s make sure we’re bringing in the perspective of marketing. So, what I would say is my guiding principle is seek difference. Those are your potential new friends.
NICOLE SMITH: OK, so Steve wants to hone in on Friday, right? And Steve asks, can you paint a quick sketch of what’s going fast after this being slower – a slower, more thoughtful process?
FRANCES FREI: I sure can. Thank you, Steve. And so, here’s how I would think about Friday. We need ruthless prioritization. And what I mean by that is that for the most part, organizations have… that we work equally on everything. We think everything is equally important. But what we know is that organizations that win, they have ruthless prioritization. And they know, this is what I’m designed to be great at. And this is what I’m designed to be bad at. Not bad for sport, bad in the service of great. And if an organization can’t discern between these two, they’re going to end up with exhausted mediocrity. And so, what we have to do for our employees and the rest of the organization is, here’s what we’re going to optimize on. That’s half the story. And here’s what we’re not. So, I’ll give you an example of this. And the example is from Steve Jobs. And if those of you that are a bit techie, and you remember 20 years ago, when Steve Jobs walked out on that Worldwide Developer Conference stage with a manila envelope, and it had a MacBook Air in it. And he slid out that MacBook Air. And the crowd and the world went crazy, because it was the lightest-weight laptop in the world. Well, he very, very openly said, we are best in class at weight because we are worst in class at physical features. We could have been best in class at physical features. But then we would have been worst in class at weight. Or we could have chosen to be average at both. But then we would have had to rename our company. And then he made fun of another company that I won’t say here. So, we will end up… if we aren’t deliberate, we’re going to end up with exhausted mediocrity, constantly getting better at the things we’re bad at, which, without realizing it, means we’re getting worse at the things we’re good at. So, the most important thing we can do on Friday is to articulate, this is what we want to be disproportionately good at. And thus, this is what we want to be disproportionately bad at. And there’s a whole other series of things. But that’s the most important one.
NICOLE SMITH: Mm-hmm. Speaking of Steve Jobs, we have a question where they ask, do you think that the culture in Silicon Valley is changing from break things to fix things, particularly as it pertains to not only their own companies, but broader societal problems?
FRANCES FREI: Yeah, so I – not in all of Silicon Valley. So, I think we can famously see, it’s not clear to me that Twitter is moving fast and fixing things. But what I will say is that, look at Uber today. And I had the pleasure of going and working with Uber back in 2017, when they were going to move fast and break things. They are moving fast and fixing things now, and going at a catapulting speed. Or ServiceNow didn’t ever even go through move fast and break things. It’s just moving fast and fixing things. Stripe is doing the same thing. Airbnb is now moving fast and fixing things. So, what I would say is that Silicon Valley can now choose to move fast and fix things, whereas, in the past, I think they only thought they had the choice of going slow or moving fast and breaking things. Today, we have the choice. And more and more companies are making that choice.
NICOLE SMITH: Mm-hmm. And so, Bill asked, which one of these steps do you find the most commonly in need of… that companies need the most help with? So, you laid out Monday through Friday. Is there something that sticks out often?
FRANCES FREI: Well, I’ll tell you that if companies are really pressed for time, they skip Thursday. And that’s to their peril, because if we skip Thursday, that means we have to be present. And we’re a bottleneck for everything. That means people need us to translate why this is important. So, I would say that Thursday is the one that’s most often skipped. And I encourage you not to. And then I would say that Tuesday is the one that’s most often misunderstood because of all of the myths I mentioned that we have about trust. And we just think, oh, if trust is broken, we have to work around it, as opposed to going right through it and rebuilding trust.
NICOLE SMITH: So, Thursday, that’s the storytelling, honoring the past, describing it simply, right? So why do we struggle to describe things simply?
FRANCES FREI: Oh, I don’t know what your inbox looks like on your email. But you tell me how many long emails you have.
NICOLE SMITH: I refuse to deal with my inbox. I’ll deal with it later.
FRANCES FREI: So, Mark Twain was right. I apologize for sending you a long letter. I didn’t have the time to send you a short letter. It’s the metaphor for all of this, that when we understand something in a complicated way, we want to benefit people from the entirety of our knowledge. And we just throw up all of it on people, as opposed to realizing the beautiful curation and skill that’s required to go from understanding it deeply to understanding it elegantly in its simplicity. So, I think it takes time. It’s also… it takes skill. Like, this is… there are professional communicators for a reason. They’re really good at it. But if you’re on your second draft of something, you have no chance of describing it simply. So, I would say, unless you’re on your 10th draft, you’re probably describing it in too complicated of a way.
NICOLE SMITH: Yeah. So, can I ask you a little bit more of a personal question, Professor?
FRANCES FREI: Yeah, anything.
NICOLE SMITH: So, Abby asks, how do you apply the essential steps to moving fast and fixing things in your own consulting role? So, Uber and all the places that you go.
FRANCES FREI: Yeah. Yeah, so I’ll tell you, when we’ve been successful, it’s when organizations come to us, and they say, here’s our problem. Will you help us? When we’ve been unsuccessful is when we go to the organizations, and we’re like, we think you’re having a problem. So, pull works. Push doesn’t. So, the only thing we can’t provide is the desire to change. And so, I would say personally, make sure there’s an opening. And then you can be super helpful in fixing a problem. And I also would say that all of this applies to yourself. I mean, that ruthless prioritization – so many of us are trying to be good at as many things as possible – at work, at home, daughter, sister, cousin, parent, friend – as opposed to, I’m going to kill it at work, kill it at home. And I am not going to be good… not now. I’m not going to be as good at all of these other things. So, you can either choose exhausted mediocrity, or you can have the nobility of excellence. These things are choices. So, I think all of this applies to ourselves.
NICOLE SMITH: So, let’s go back to Tuesday, where you drew that triangle with logic, and empathy, and authenticity. So, Hung asks, between logic and empathy, which one would you say an individual should develop first? And Hung really describes just having a left foot and right foot and not knowing which one to go forward.
FRANCES FREI: Yeah. So, here’s what I would say, Hung, is, ask yourself… I bet you’re trusted most of the time, which means people are experiencing your authenticity, logic, and empathy most of the time. But ask yourself, the last time, or the most recent times you had a skeptic, you had someone who was doubting you, who they were wobbling on your trust, ask yourself, what is it that they doubted about you? And if it’s that they doubted your logic, double click there. If they doubted your empathy, double click there. And that is, each of us has what we call a wobble. Each one of us has a pattern where the distribution of these is higher for one or the other. That’s the sequence I would go in. There’s not some generic sequence that is better. All three of these pillars are equally important. But I bet, for each one of us, one tends to be more shaky than the other. And that’s what I would go after. Now, I will just tell you the distribution in the world. The vast majority of us have empathy wobbles, then logic wobbles, then authenticity wobbles. But that doesn’t help any of us specifically. It just tells us we have lots of company.
NICOLE SMITH: OK. So, we got a lot more questions and a little time. I want to get as many as I can in, but…
FRANCES FREI: OK, I’ll go super quick. Yeah.
NICOLE SMITH: No, take your time. But I just want to let you know, you’re pretty popular in this conversation. Rock star, as Allison said. Tara asks, how can company leadership make sure that their messaging is actually heard and understood? I feel like you touched on this a bit with simplicity.
FRANCES FREI: Yeah. Yeah, and I think that the way to do it is, talk to people about your message that didn’t hear it directly from you. And see how well they understood. That tells you whether or not it’s reaching. So, don’t ask the people that were in the room. Ask the people that were spoken to by other people in the room. That will tell you how well it’s there. And if it took you a long time to describe it, I promise you, it’s not going to be heard.
NICOLE SMITH: Mm. Oh, wow. Yeah, thinking about it, probably need to shorten my own stories a little bit here. So, Karen asks you, how do you handle employees who are not willing to accept others’ points of view and be open minded? I mean, you described this uniqueness and diversity. But there are people who are holdouts that don’t see the advantage of that.
FRANCES FREI: So, I often find those folks are an education away, because if I can let you know that if I get to benefit from everyone’s point of view, and you only get to benefit from some people’s point of view, I will competitively thump you. So, let’s say you don’t have the moral imperative wanting to do it. Well, the performance imperative… we have found that organizations that are inclusive get a 200% to 500% boost on employee engagement and team performance with no new people, no new technology, simply the act of being inclusive. So, the person who doesn’t want to be inclusive, I’m going to ask them, can they afford… can their career afford performing so suboptimally?
NICOLE SMITH: Mm. And so, we have a question. The person didn’t leave their name, so I don’t have a name. But how much time do you spend on each stage? Some folks like to spend more time on stages than others. Does the team not move forward until everyone’s satisfied with the current step? What do you do when you hit a roadblock on each stage, and not everyone is in agreement?
FRANCES FREI: Yeah. Well, I don’t like consensus, so I’ll just… I’ll say there. And so, what I try to do is work on momentum, which is that I want to make sure that everybody’s voices have been heard. But then you have to leave the decision to someone else. So, we want to do is make sure everybody’s voices are heard, and they had a chance to do it. But we don’t hold out until the very last person. We move forward. And then we can retrace and see if the momentum can bring people forward. So, not consensus. I would consider it not consensus, and we have to make sure that everybody gets to air out what their problems are.
NICOLE SMITH: OK. Well, Christopher asks our last question. How does transparency fit into this model, specifically this trust, authenticity, logic model? Does it have a place?
FRANCES FREI: Yeah. It sure does. And I find that the most important part for transparency is on the logic side. So, if you’re going to say… if you’re going to inspect whether or not I have good rigor, and I have a good plan, I could say, oh, just have faith. I did all of this hard work. Or I could give you a glimpse inside so that you can see the inner workings. Now, I often call it a window of transparency, because there’s actually a cost of full transparency that I’m not always willing to take. But a window of transparency, I think we always need. So, to me, the transparency part is, let’s be transparent about our logic so people can see it for themselves, and they don’t have to do it in too much of a faith-based way.
NICOLE SMITH: Professor, that was all dynamic. And thank you for the illustrations. You made it simple with the illustrations.
FRANCES FREI: Yeah, all right. Awesome. Thanks so much.
NICOLE SMITH: Thank you for your time.
FRANCES FREI: OK.
HANNAH BATES: That was Harvard Business School professor Frances Frei in conversation with HBR’s editorial audience director Nicole Smith at the “Future of Business” virtual conference in November 2023.
We’ll be back next Wednesday with another hand-picked conversation about leadership from Harvard Business Review. If you found this episode helpful, share it with your friends and colleagues, and follow our show on Apple Podcasts, Spotify, or wherever you get your podcasts. While you’re there, be sure to leave us a review.
When you’re ready for more podcasts, articles, case studies, books, and videos with the world’s top business and management experts, you’ll find it all at HBR.org.
This episode was produced by Anne Saini, and me, Hannah Bates. Ian Fox is our editor. Music by Coma Media. Special thanks to Dave Di Iulio, Terry Cole, and Maureen Hoch, Erica Truxler, Ramsey Khabbaz, Nicole Smith, Anne Bartholomew, and you – our listener. See you next week.
This article is about leadership and managing people.
Produced by reuse company r.World, the cups are good for 300 uses and are already at more than 200 venues across the U.S. Their creator says this is just the beginning.
By Katie Bain
Scan the ground after any given concert or music festival and one thing you’re almost certain to see is a scattering of empty plastic cups. According to a 2024 report by environmental advocacy agency Upstream, the live-event industry creates over 4 billion single-use cups that end up in landfills every year in North America alone.
It doesn’t have to be this way — and reuse company r.World wants to lead the change. The Minneapolis-based company provides reusable serveware — cups, food containers and more — for mass gatherings, with these products designed to mitigate the persistent single-use plastic waste problem in the live music industry and beyond.
Founded in 2017, r.World provides reusable plastic cups and other serveware to more than 200 venues across the U.S., along with festivals like Long Beach’s 20,000 capacity Cali Vibes and San Francisco’s 30,000-capacity Portola. In late May, the company partnered with Los Angeles’ Crypto.com Arena, home of the NBA’s Lakers and Clippers, and Peacock Theater to launch a full-time reusable cup program in each venue.
But the mission extends far beyond concerts and sports, with r.World aiming to build the infrastructure for a national reuse economy that would extend to airlines, consumer packaged goods, restaurants and more, ultimately becoming “a one-stop national solution,” Martin says. “The music industry has essentially launched and is leading the reuse movement in the country, and it’s inspiring universities, corporate campuses, quick-service restaurants and others.”
At the center of this movement is the plastic cup itself. Good for 300 uses, r.Cups are made of thick plastic designed and manufactured to r.World specifications that Martin says “overhauled” the manufacturing process of a standard single use cup. Made in the United States to minimize carbon emissions from shipping, each cup is slapped with the words “please return our cup to an r.cup bin,” and when a cup reaches its maximum number of uses, it’s upcycled into other r.World products.
The sweeping project started 10 years ago, when Martin’s other company, the climate solutions-focused Effects Partners, was hired to analyze operations at Live Nation and create a sustainability strategy. While assembling a five-year plan for the live-events behemoth, Martin realized “the recycling and composting efforts at the venues were never going to work,” given that most everything ultimately just ended up in landfills. The realization made him “depressed for, like, six months,” until he considered the reuse programs he’d seen in European venues — and then developed r.World.
Through connections to U2 , Martin suggested the band try reuse on their 2017 tour. It was a success, and r.World was soon working with 13 acts, including the Rolling Stones , Dave Matthews Band , Bon Jovi , Radiohead and Maggie Rogers , all of whom gave Martin permission to go to venues on their behalf and request that the venue try reuse during their show.
The first r.Cup cups were branded with band logos, until the team realized fans were just keeping them as souvenirs. In 2019, the model morphed into “an ugly cup” people were less inclined to take home.
Cups are collected in yellow bins that sit alongside garbage cans and recycling containers at venues, then brought to an r.World-owned wash hub facility. These hubs are built in economically depressed areas of any given city to help spur the economy, and are where cups are washed and inspected, largely staffed by people living in halfway houses or who are getting back on their feet after getting out of prison.
These local facilities are crucial because, as Martin says, “you can’t prioritize the environment if you’re shipping cups great distances across the country” due to the carbon emissions created by such transport. r.World plans to establish wash hubs and reuse solutions in the top 20-30 U.S. markets, having already launched in seven. The company expects to add another one or two cities in the coming months and is in conversation with officials from nearly every city they are targeting. “We know the demand and need is there,” says Martin. While the majority of r.World’s current business is cups, Martin cites “exploding” demand for food containers at venues, festivals, schools and corporate campuses.
r.Cup typically launches in a venue after a facility or concession manager reaches out to ask about reuse. (Martin notes that they have a 99% client retention rate, and the one venue that did let go of the program was having financial issues.) With an operational design developed via focus groups with national concessionaires like Levy Restaurants, Aramark and Sodexo US, r.World provides everything from cups and collection bins to signage, employee training materials and social media content to educate guests, offering “a complete turnkey solution so it’s a no brainer for the operators,” says Martin. Venues are also provided with environmental impact reporting that uses EPA guidelines to consider everything from the sourcing and shipping of cups to the temperature of the water used to clean them. (Martin says the company is “sort of obsessive” about these protocols, which he attributes to “being a numbers geek.)
Cost of implementation is based on the number of single use items required by a venue and varies by how much of their service is packaged drinks versus draft or fountain drinks. Martin says the biggest arenas that serve draft and fountain beverages go through 1.5 million-2.5 million single use cups per year. While upfront costs of r.World products are higher than single use, the cost over time is generally less given that venues must keep buying the reusable plastic cups that get thrown away after each event.
Some venues embed this added expense into the drink price, while others allow guests to opt out and get a single use cup for a slightly lower cost. (Over r.World’s millions of transactions, Martin has heard about “two or three” people opting out.) Drink servers are also into r.Cup, he says, “because they felt bad giving out all that single use waste, and cups are a conversation starter with guests.” Beyond the price differentials, Martin says the biggest hesitation venues and events have about adopting reusable cups is an “imagination gap,” along with other factors like existing vendor contracts, venue infrastructure and apathy and misinformation, such as thinking single-use aluminum or compostable cups are good for the environment.
To wit, reusable cups are alternatives to frequently-used compostable cups, which have a dicey record of being composted and behave as a regular single use plastic cup if they end up in a landfill. Aluminum cups and bottles also often end up in landfills given that recycling sorting at events can be spotty. A 2023 Upstream report states that “single-use aluminum cups are the worst option for the climate by far,” as they use 47% more energy over their life cycle and create 86% more carbon dioxide than other single-use plastic options.
As sustainability initiatives become more common and more in-demand across the industry and culture at large, more than 150 national reuse companies have launched since the pandemic. In 2022, Live Nation invested in Turn Systems, a program that provides reusable cups, collection bins and mobile washing systems at venues and festivals. As such, r.World is partnered with Live Nation competitors including AEG, ASM and NIVA, and provides product washing for other reuse companies.
Beyond venues and events, r.World clients include the Coca-Cola Company, which is widely cited as one of the world’s leading single-use plastic waste producers. Coca-Cola has made a commitment to incorporating 25% reusable products by 2030 and is working with r.World to provide reuse services for Coca-Cola clients like music venues, movie theaters, the Olympics, the World Cup and wherever else Coca-Cola wants to implement reuse. r.World has also been selected by the EPA and the White House’s Council on Environmental Quality to help raise national awareness of reuse.
Martin says that while an industry has developed to help solve the single use plastic problem, many waste management and consumer packaged goods companies would rather not see a large-scale shift to reuse happen. And despite the explosive growth in the sector, Martin says r.World’s biggest competitors are still single-use cups and serveware, whether plastic, compostable or aluminum.
This is where artists and fans can flex their power by requesting reuse programs in their riders and spending money at venues with reuse programs given, Martin says, that “businesses will give back what consumers are asking for.”
Daily newsletters straight to your inbox
Spotify unveils basic, music-only subscription tier at reduced price.
In canada: allison russell named billboard canada women in music breakthrough artist of the year.
Billboard is a part of Penske Media Corporation. © 2024 Billboard Media, LLC. All Rights Reserved.
Charts expand charts menu.
Culture expand culture menu, media expand media menu, business expand business menu.
Honda music expand honda-music menu.
decentralization wars
Blast meme coin pacmoon appeared to solve a key problem that’s vexed crypto for years. the future was limitless—until a twitter update undid everything..
For years, countless crypto startups have tried—and failed—to get one innovation right: a sustainable, on-chain system for financially incentivizing online behavior (browsing social media, reading articles, watching videos) that rewards creators and consumers alike.
The concept, dubbed SocialFi, speaks to the heart of what crypto once promised: an escape from the iron grip of billionaire tech elites who monetize your every online move, and a means to recapture that wealth for the many.
Last month, a Blast meme coin community called Pacmoon (PAC) debuted what appeared to be a novel solution to crypto’s SocialFi problem. For a few weeks, the system, Pacmoon v2, soared: members of the PAC community began accumulating tokens with real monetary value in exchange for simple engagement on Twitter that, crucially, appeared to reward quality content and box out spammy token farmers and automated bots.
The future, for Pacmoon and for crypto, looked bright. Then, last week, Elon Musk’s Twitter abruptly moved to make user “likes” data private—crippling Pacmoon’s nascent SocialFi scheme in an instant, and laying bare crypto’s continued dependence on the very tech billionaires it seeks to free us from.
Pacmoon was started earlier this year by a crypto trader and two friends who sought to create the first dominant meme coin on Blast —a new Ethereum layer-2 scaling network from the creators of Blur , the disruptive, incentivized NFT marketplace.
From the beginning, “Bobby Big Yield,” Pacmoon’s pseudonymous founder, knew he needed to make PAC multifaceted if it was going to succeed. It couldn’t just be a meme coin, so many of which fade away with the next news cycle—it had to be a “community coin,” designed to operate as a social home base for Blast’s lucrative, finance-focused user base.
If Bobby could find a way to incorporate SocialFi features into PAC, he figured, the token would never fade from relevance. It would serve as the backbone of a self-perpetuating ecosystem in which Blast users got rewarded to engage with each other.
But the trader was under no illusions about SocialFi. He’d seen countless crypto projects amass activity with flashy promises of rewarding social media behavior, then collapse after forward momentum slowed.
“Going viral once, getting a bunch of people to use your product, is not that hard for any decent crypto marketer and competent product team,” Bobby told Decrypt . “What's hard is to get people to do it twice.”
So Bobby and his colleagues devised a novel SocialFi solution, one they dubbed “social validation.” Borrowing inspiration from the structure of proof-of-stake networks like Ethereum— which rely on independent validators who have significant financial “stake” in the network to authenticate transactions—Pacmoon would tap the token’s biggest holders to curate community Twitter behavior and reward quality posts.
The logic behind empowering “social validators” was the same relied on by countless blockchain networks. Pacmoon validators (those holding 10,000 PAC or more; $2,300 worth at peak price) would naturally be invested in boosting the value of their own tokens, and thus the long-term success of the Pacmoon brand, by curating quality social media content—not the countless “BUY TOKEN NOW” posts that flood most Crypto Twitter timelines.
If Pacmoon validators got sent PAC for liking Pacmoon-related tweets, and the authors of those tweets got rewarded in PAC too, Bobby figured the system would unlock a stream of genuinely engaging social media content that would bring the Pacmoon community closer together and keep PAC relevant in perpetuity.
When Pacmoon v2—the version debuting “social validators”—launched in late May, Bobby’s thesis was largely proven right. Pacmoon holders loved the innovation, and immediately went to work creating elaborate artworks , raps , and animations to garner likes from the roughly 1,600 Pacmoon whales who signed up to become validators.
Even Beeple , the world-renowned digital artist behind the most expensive NFT ever sold, jumped on the bandwagon.
PACMOONIANS ENJOYING A GOLDEN SHOWER ✨ pic.twitter.com/DCFCtoeRPB — beeple (@beeple) June 3, 2024
Ovie Faruq (aka OSF), a crypto influencer with over 195,000 Twitter followers who signed up to become one of Pacmoon’s first social validators, told Decrypt shortly after the debut of v2 that he particularly liked how the system relied on Twitter likes—not reposts or any other form of active promotion that could dilute his brand or legitimacy.
“For accounts with larger followings, you don’t want to be shilling,” Faruq said at the time. “Now I can still engage with it, but do it passively.”
He also added that the system encouraged him to organically engage with Pacmoon-related content as he would ordinarily—increasing the net quality of the Pacmoon ecosystem, and potentially offering a glimpse of a SocialFi model finally fit to gain long-term traction.
“I think that's the first time I've seen anything like this,” Faruq said. “It’s a model that I think any brand new crypto project starting out could definitely use.”
Bobby, meanwhile, was blown away by Pacmoon v2’s success. Pacmoon holders were creating real social bonds; the system facilitating those bonds was spreading the Pacmoon brand across Twitter, for free; and all the while, PAC was pumping towards all-time highs.
“We’re creating an almost infinitely higher number of connections between members of our communities,” Bobby said at the end of May. “And this advertising… we can't pay for it.”
Less than two weeks later, it all fell apart.
On June 12, Elon Musk announced that Twitter had made all likes on the platform private, apparently in the name of user privacy .
Based on how Pacmoon collected data, the policy change immediately derailed Pacmoon v2. Unless Bobby and his team wanted to pay for exorbitantly expensive access to Twitter’s enterprise API platform—something they say they couldn’t afford—their “social validation” experiment was kaput.
Important change: your likes are now private https://t.co/acUL8HqjUJ — Elon Musk (@elonmusk) June 12, 2024
As soon as they saw the post, Bobby and his fellow Pacmoon builders faced hard questions. Chief among them: Was their ultimate goal really cracking crypto’s SocialFi problem, even in the face of obstacles lobbed by one of the world’s richest men? Or were they just here to make a fun meme coin?
They chose the latter answer. Pacmoon v2 was halted; the team worked furiously to cook up a new path forward less dependent on SocialFi. The price of PAC immediately collapsed by over 50%. At writing, it’s sunk to roughly $.07 .
“It sucks to say ‘Well, we have to scale it back,’” Bobby recently said. “At least for now, it makes the most sense for us to focus on creating fun content and making sure everybody has a good experience, with the financial incentives more as just a fun cherry on top.”
Pacmoon v3 launched on Wednesday. Effectively, Pacmoon validators no longer validate. The job of curating community content has fallen back on the official Pacmoon Twitter account , which retweets 100-odd top posts of the day. Those chosen posters earn PAC, as do Pacmoon validators, so long as they like any one Pacmoon-related tweet on a daily basis.
Pacmoon v3 is undeniably more centralized—and less democratic—than v2 was.
Pacmoon V3 is now live! Create content and like tweets to earn $PAC How it works 👇 pic.twitter.com/jp2tGrd71k — PACMOON (@pacmoon_) June 19, 2024
Bobby insists that v2 wasn’t perfect to begin with. He says that the job of weeding out nefarious token farming among Pacmoon validators was becoming cumbersome and costly to his small team, and that playing the role of policeman was threatening Pacmoon’s feel-good “vibes.” He maintains the transition was for the best.
But he nonetheless believes that he stumbled across something crucial in innovating the concept of “social validators.” Perhaps a piece of a future SocialFi system that can really, finally work—maybe if harnessed by a large enough platform with enough resources to build it out, then let it soar.
A fight for another day, then, to be waged by someone with a lot more power than Bobby.
That’s the grim irony of crypto’s enduring SocialFi dilemma. Even if tech arises capable of propelling an incentivized social media engagement cycle forward in perpetuity, it currently must depend on hyper-centralized platforms like Twitter, which are popular enough to meet people where they are.
Decentralized social media alternatives like Farcaster do exist. But they have a long, long way to go before they grow big enough to fuse with tools like Pacmoon v2 and unlock SocialFi’s futuristic potential.
Just a few weeks ago, Bobby thought that future was here. Now, he’s feeling a lot less optimistic.
“I'm kind of realizing, to be honest, decentralized social media is actually very, very hard to do right,” Bobby said this week. “I think it's virtually impossible to get it right now.”
Edited by Andrew Hayward
If you're seeing this message, it means we're having trouble loading external resources on our website.
If you're behind a web filter, please make sure that the domains *.kastatic.org and *.kasandbox.org are unblocked.
To log in and use all the features of Khan Academy, please enable JavaScript in your browser.
Two-step inequalities.
It's not the first time the Three Lions have had an uninspiring start to a tournament, and some of the issues facing the manager will remind fans of other failed attempts to win a second major title.
Sports correspondent @RobHarris
Friday 21 June 2024 13:24, UK
Completing their Euro 2024 group against Slovenia on Tuesday brings back memories for England of another tournament when they were booed by their own fans.
Slovenia were the only team beaten by England at the 2010 World Cup in South Africa in an era of underachievement, despite all the talent available.
Sound familiar?
Gareth Southgate endures what so many predecessors have struggled with - producing performances and results to match the high expectations.
The England manager saw it in 2018 - reaching the World Cup semi-finals but then wilting under the spotlight against Croatia.
He saw it in 2021 at Wembley - initially overpowering Italy in the Euros final only to lose on penalties.
And he saw it again on Thursday night in Frankfurt in the 1-1 draw with Denmark at these Euros, as England's control descended into capitulation.
Serbian FA charged after objects thrown at England's Euro 2024 match
England fans revel in 'good vibes' as tense 1-0 win against Serbia sees Three Lions top Euro 2024 group
Euro 2024: A new-look England and another moment for Jude Bellingham to shine
So where does it leave their campaign in Germany and what does Southgate need to address?
Remember, this isn't a unique situation. It is now 10 appearances at European Championships that Englishmen have failed to open the tournament with two wins.
• Plan ahead
Don't panic - England already seem to have enough points to qualify for the knockout phase.
Staying top of Group C avoids meeting a group winner.
But if England finish second, it could be hosts Germany standing in the way of the quarter-finals.
And if they finish third, they may not know their last-16 opponents until Wednesday, the day after their last group game against Slovenia.
• Midfield muddle
The lack of structure and cohesion in midfield is a problem.
Surely the Denmark game marks the end of seeing defender Trent Alexander-Arnold being deployed in midfield?
Perhaps Phil Foden is in need of a rest against Slovenia - ready to be unleashed later in Germany to recapture the form that saw him named the Premier League's Player of the Season and FWA Footballer of the Year while sweeping to a fourth title in a row with Manchester City.
Last night's laboured performance in the heat of Frankfurt - with the roof closed - was in desperate need of a spark of creativity.
Southgate left Jack Grealish and James Maddison at home after a season of struggles with fitness and form.
Why, though, is he yet to give any playing time at the Euros to Cole Palmer? The 22-year-old was Premier League Young Player of the Season with 22 goals and 11 assists as the shining light in an underwhelming Chelsea side.
Would Eberechi Eze benefit from more than the 22-minute cameo against Denmark in which he managed only 10 touches of the ball?
• Goal threat
After the Denmark draw, Harry Kane pointed to uncertainty in the side over pressing opponents.
Once the other team starts dropping deeper, England can't figure out how to exert more pressure on them.
Kane and Jude Bellingham did attempt to get ahead of the Danish midfielders in the second half - when it was already 1-1 - but they couldn't make an impact.
Read more: Southgate says 'huge amount of work' to do after Denmark draw Serbia threaten to pull out of Euro 2024 Eight England fans arrested at Euro 2024
Yet Bellingham, who scored the only goal in the opening win over Serbia, certainly knows how to be effective at club level.
Just look at his 23 goals and 10 assists in his first 42 games for Real Madrid last season.
And Kane was even more prolific at Bayern - contributing 44 goals and setting up another 12 in 45 games.
IMAGES
VIDEO
COMMENTS
Summary. Many simple inequalities can be solved by adding, subtracting, multiplying or dividing both sides until you are left with the variable on its own. But these things will change direction of the inequality: Multiplying or dividing both sides by a negative number. Swapping left and right hand sides.
Using inequalities to solve problems; Compound inequalities; Solving equations & inequalities: Quiz 3; Solving equations & inequalities: Unit test; About this unit. There are lots of strategies we can use to solve equations. Let's explore some different ways to solve equations and inequalities. We'll also see what it takes for an equation to ...
3x/3 < 18/3. x < 6. Solving this example required two steps (step one: subtract 8 from both sides; step two: divide both sides by 3). The result is the solved inequality x<6. The step-by-step procedure to solving example #2 is illustrated in Figure 04 below. Figure 04: How to solve an inequality: 3x+8<26.
Answer. Inequality: x < −3 x < − 3. Interval: (−∞, −3) ( − ∞, − 3) Graph: −2 − 2, the inequality symbol was switched from > to <. [/hidden-answer] The following video shows examples of solving one step inequalities using the multiplication property of equality where the variable is on the left hand side.
It can be solved many way, here we will solve it by completing the square: Move the −7 to the right side of the inequality: W2 − 8W ≤ −7. Complete the square on the left side of the inequality and balance this by adding the same value to the right side of the inequality: W2 − 8W + 16 ≤ −7 + 16. Simplify: (W − 4)2 ≤ 9.
Overview. Inequalities are arguably a branch of elementary algebra, and relate slightly to number theory. They deal with relations of variables denoted by four signs: . For two numbers and : if is greater than , that is, is positive. if is smaller than , that is, is negative. if is greater than or equal to , that is, is nonnegative.
Here, the inequality from the given word problem is: 165 - 2t < 155. On subtracting 165 from both sides, we get. 165 - 2t - 165 < 155 - 165. ⇒ - 2t < -10. On dividing by -2, the inequality sign is reversed. − 2 t − 2 > − 10 − 2. ⇒ t > 5. Rory and Cinder are on the same debate team.
Inequalities word problems. Kwame must earn more than 16 stars per day to get a prize from the classroom treasure box. Write an inequality that describes S , the number of stars Kwame must earn per day to get a prize from the classroom treasure box. Learn for free about math, art, computer programming, economics, physics, chemistry, biology ...
Learn. Modeling with systems of inequalities. Writing systems of inequalities word problem. Solving systems of inequalities word problem. Graphs of systems of inequalities word problem. Graphs of two-variable inequalities word problem.
We use these properties to solve inequalities, taking the same steps we used to solve equations. Solving the inequality x + 5 > 9, the steps would look like this: x + 5 > 9 Subtract 5 from both sides to isolate x. x + 5 − 5 > 9 − 5 x > 4. Any number greater than 4 is a solution to this inequality.
Here are the steps for solving inequalities: Step - 1: Write the inequality as an equation. Step - 2: Solve the equation for one or more values. Step - 3: Represent all the values on the number line. Step - 4: Also, represent all excluded values on the number line using open circles. Step - 5: Identify the intervals. Step - 6: Take a random number from each interval, substitute it in the ...
To solve inequalities, isolate the variable on one side of the inequality, If you multiply or divide both sides by a negative number, flip the direction of the inequality. ... Study Tools AI Math Solver Popular Problems Worksheets Study Guides Practice Cheat Sheets Calculators Graphing Calculator Geometry Calculator.
Step 4 Divide each term of the inequality by the coefficient of the unknown. If the coefficient is positive, the inequality will remain the same. If the coefficient is negative, the inequality will be reversed. Step 5 Check your answer. Solve linear or quadratic inequalities with our free step-by-step algebra calculator.
5 problems similar to: 5 problems similar to: Learn about inequalities using our free math solver with step-by-step solutions.
The form of the answer in the previous line, 4 ≥ x, is perfectly acceptable. As long as you remember to flip the inequality sign when you multiply or divide through by a negative, you shouldn't have any trouble with solving linear inequalities. Page 1 Page 2. Page 3. Linear inequalities can be simple (x<3) or complex (3x+2≤½−14x), and ...
The steps are like solving one-step equations involving multiplication or division EXCEPT for the inequality sign. Let's look at what happens to the inequality when you multiply or divide each side by the same number. Let's start with the true statement: 10 > 5 10 > 5.
Enter the inequality below which you want to simplify. The inequality calculator simplifies the given inequality. You will get the final answer in inequality form and interval notation. Step 2: Click the blue arrow to submit. Choose "Simplify" from the topic selector and click to see the result in our Algebra Calculator! Examples. Simplify
Solve percent problems using strip models 6. Percents of numbers and money amounts 7. Percents of numbers: word problems 8. Solve percent equations ... One-step inequalities: word problems 7. Solve two-step inequalities 8. Graph solutions to two-step inequalities V. ...
Art of Problem Solving AoPS Online. Math texts, online classes, and more for students in grades 5-12. Visit AoPS Online ‚ Books for Grades 5-12 ...
Solve GRE practice problems covering Quant (One answer choice and multiple answer choice), Data Interpretation, Text Completion, Sentence Equivalence, and Reading Comprehension Problems. ... Which of the following inequalities is equivalent to \(-9 \leq x \leq 3\)? Find the midpoint of the two extremes, \(-9\) and \(3\), which is \(\frac{-9 ...
Time is running out in South Africa to find solutions to its real-world problems — otherwise the country may well become another textbook case on what happens when inequality is allowed to fester.
One-step inequalities. Solve for x . Your answer must be simplified. Learn for free about math, art, computer programming, economics, physics, chemistry, biology, medicine, finance, history, and more. Khan Academy is a nonprofit with the mission of providing a free, world-class education for anyone, anywhere.
Problem-solving strategies can be enhanced with the application of creative techniques. You can use creativity to: Approach problems from different angles. Improve your problem-solving process. Spark creativity in your employees and peers. 6. Adaptability. Adaptability is the capacity to adjust to change. When a particular solution to an issue ...
The three-body problem is a physics conundrum that has boggled scientists since Isaac Newton's day. But what is it, why is it so hard to solve and is the sci-fi series of the same name really ...
It almost seems like a simple math problem: 45-47 = -2. There appears to be some disagreement, at least among merchandise providers, about the house style for capturing this unusual campaign twist.
In this episode, Frei explains how you can solve any problem in five clear steps. First, she says, start by identifying the real problem holding you back. Then move on to building trust and ...
Produced by reuse company r.World, the cups are good for 300 uses and are already at more than 200 venues across the U.S. Their creator says this is just the beginning. By Katie Bain Scan the ...
Pacmoon v2. Pacmoon was started earlier this year by a crypto trader and two friends who sought to create the first dominant meme coin on Blast —a new Ethereum layer-2 scaling network from the creators of Blur, the disruptive, incentivized NFT marketplace.. From the beginning, "Bobby Big Yield," Pacmoon's pseudonymous founder, knew he needed to make PAC multifaceted if it was going to ...
Two-step inequality word problem: apples. Two-step inequality word problem: R&B. Two-step inequality word problems. Math > 7th grade > Expressions, equations, & inequalities > ... Learn for free about math, art, computer programming, economics, physics, chemistry, biology, medicine, finance, history, and more. Khan Academy is a nonprofit with ...
Euro 2024: Three England problems Gareth Southgate must solve after dull Denmark draw. It's not the first time the Three Lions have had an uninspiring start to a tournament, and some of the issues ...