Algebra Unit A2

Linear Inequalities in One Variable

When the answer is a range — solve it, draw it, and respect the sign flip.

An inequality's answer is a whole range, not a single number — you solve it like an equation, except for the one sign flip that catches everyone.

When the answer is “anything up to…”

Back to the phone plan one last time: $2020 a month plus $33 per gigabyte, and this month your budget is $3535. How much data can you afford? Not “exactly how much” — up to how much. The question itself isn’t an equation; it’s a constraint:

20+3g3520 + 3g \le 35

An inequality replaces == with <\lt, >\gt, \le (“at most”), or \ge (“at least”), and its answer isn’t a single number but a whole range. Real life runs on these: speed limits, minimum heights, passing grades, budgets. Solve this one with exactly the A1 balance moves — subtract 2020 from both sides (3g153g \le 15), divide by 33 (g5g \le 5) — and the answer is every usage up to five gigabytes. On a number line, that’s not a dot; it’s a shaded ray.

Almost everything transfers from A1 unchanged. One rule is new, and it’s the whole ballgame.

The flip rule — and why you have no choice

Multiply or divide both sides by a negative number and you must flip the inequality sign. Here’s the picture that makes it obvious rather than arbitrary: multiplying by 1-1 reflects the whole number line through zero. Reflections reverse left and right — 22 sits left of 44, but their mirror images land the other way around: 2-2 sits right of 4-4. So any true "<\lt" between two numbers must become ">\gt" between their negatives. The numbers have no choice, so neither do you.

Why is this the single most-forgotten rule in algebra? Because equations trained you that negatives are harmless — in A1 you divided by 2-2 all day and equality never cared, since a mirror image of “equal” is still “equal.” Order is the thing mirrors break, and inequalities are made of order. When in doubt, run the two-second check: 2<4-2 \lt 4 is true; divide both by 2-2 and keeping the sign claims 1<21 \lt -2 — false; flip it, 1>21 \gt -2 ✓.

The rule also gets over-applied, for the same fuzzy reason (“negative… flip something?”). Adding or subtracting a negative never flips — sliding the whole line left or right keeps everyone’s order — and dividing by a positive never flips. Only a negative ×/÷ holds up the mirror.

Here is the whole journey performed once at the board — solve, flip at the negative, then draw the answer as a range:

Press play — the board writes itself.

0:00 / 1:37
Transcript

Quick — what does the answer to an inequality even look like? It's not one number… it's a whole range of them. So we solve it like an equation, then draw exactly what we found. Watch.

Here's ours: seven minus two x is less than one. Same moves as any equation — let's get x by itself.

Take seven off both sides. That leaves minus two x is less than minus six.

Now here's the step everybody gets wrong. To free the x, we divide by minus two — and any time you divide an inequality by a negative, the sign has to flip. Less-than becomes greater-than. So: x greater than three. Miss that flip, and your whole answer points the wrong way.

Now let's draw it. The boundary's at three — but is three itself in? Let's check the original: seven minus six is one… and one is not less than one. So three fails — we mark it with an open, hollow circle: not this point.

But everything to the right of three should work. Test one — try five: seven minus ten is minus three, and that's way less than one. True. So we shade everything past three, off to the right.

So there's your answer — not a single number, but a whole ray: every value bigger than three, with that hollow circle marking the one spot left out. Strict sign, open circle. An 'or equal to' would've filled it in solid.

Solve it, then draw it · 1:38

Now solve one yourself:

(sign flipped)
-10-9-8-7-6-5-4-3-2-1012-4
set upSolve it like an equation, one balanced move at a time: .
collect xMove the -terms to one side and the numbers to the other: .
÷ negative → flipDivide both sides by — it's negative, so flip the inequality sign: .
test a value:  x =

is not in the solution ✗

Solve one and see the range

The solver opens on 2x+19-2x + 1 \ge 9. Predict where the flip will happen before you read the steps (1-1 first — no flip; then ÷(2)\div(-2) — flip). Then use the tester: drop in 4-4, then 5-5, then 00, and watch which ones land inside the shaded range.

Graphing: open ○ vs closed ●

To draw x5x \le 5: mark the boundary, shade the true side, and let the circle at the boundary say whether 55 itself belongs. An “or equal to” sign (\le, \ge) includes the boundary — closed ●. A strict sign (<\lt, >\gt) excludes it — open ○. Strict ranges have a strange, useful property: x<6x \lt 6 contains 5.95.9, 5.995.99, 5.9995.999… but no largest solution, because the boundary itself is the one point missing.

x
-3-2-101234567893

Open ○ circle at 3 (boundary not included), shaded to the right.

Pick a symbol and a boundary

Set the boundary to 66 with <\lt, then switch to \le and watch the endpoint fill in — one pixel of ink, one number of difference.

Compound inequalities — between two bounds

Some constraints are two-sided: a package ships only if its weight ww satisfies 1<w201 \lt w \le 20 kilograms. A chain like 52t+1<11-5 \le 2t + 1 \lt 11 is just two inequalities sharing the middle expression — "52t+1-5 \le 2t+1" and "2t+1<112t + 1 \lt 11" — so any balance move must hit all three parts to keep both statements true at once. Subtract 11 from all three: 62t<10-6 \le 2t \lt 10. Divide all three by 22: 3t<5-3 \le t \lt 5 — a segment, closed at one end and open at the other. (And if you ever divide a chain by a negative, both signs flip and the chain reverses direction.) Try these in the Compound tab — its example chips include a ÷(2)\div(-2) chain.

When x vanishes

Just like equations, the xx-terms can cancel entirely. Read what remains: a statement that’s always true (5>15 \gt 1) means all real numbers satisfy it; an impossible one (5<15 \lt 1) means no solution. The logic is A1’s, wearing an inequality sign.

The one thing to remember

An inequality is solved like an equation, but its answer is a range, and ranges care about order — so the one new law is the mirror: multiplying or dividing both sides by a negative reflects the number line and flips the sign. Boundary circles say whether the edge itself counts, and a compound chain is two constraints that every move must respect at once.

What changes from equations

An inequality uses <\lt (less than), >\gt (greater than), \le (at most), or \ge (at least) instead of ==. The answer isn’t one number — it’s a whole range of numbers.

You solve it almost exactly like an equation: distribute, clear fractions, collect like terms, and undo operations to isolate xx. One rule is new, and it’s the whole ballgame.

Worked example — basic

3x7<113x - 7 \lt 11

+7 both sides
3x<183x \lt 18.
÷3 (positive — no flip)
x<6x \lt \mathbf{6}.

Worked example — the flip

2x+19-2x + 1 \ge 9

−1 both sides
2x8-2x \ge 8.
÷(−2) → flip
x4x \le \mathbf{-4}.

A great safety check: pick a number inside your range and test it in the original. x=5x = -5 is 4\le -4, and 2(5)+1=119-2(-5) + 1 = 11 \ge 9 ✓.

Graphing on a number line

Mark the boundary, then shade the direction that’s true.

SymbolCircle at the boundaryWhich way to shade
<\lt or >\gtOpen ○ — boundary not includedtoward the true side
\le or \geClosed ● — boundary includedtoward the true side

With xx on the left, greater (>\gt \ge) shades right, less (<\lt \le) shades left.

Compound inequalities

Two conditions at once.

  • “And” (between): written as one chain, e.g. 12x+3<9-1 \le 2x + 3 \lt 9. Do every operation to all three parts. Subtract 33 from all: 42x<6-4 \le 2x \lt 6. Divide all by 22: 2x<3-2 \le x \lt 3. The solution is the segment between 2-2 and 33.
  • “Or”: e.g. x<1x \lt -1 or x>4x \gt 4 — two separate rays going opposite directions.

Two special answers

Sometimes the xx-terms cancel out completely. Look at what’s left:

You end up with…Meaning
A true statement, e.g. 5>15 \gt 1All real numbers — every xx works.
A false statement, e.g. 5<15 \lt 1No solution — no xx can work.
(sign flipped)
-10-9-8-7-6-5-4-3-2-1012-4
set upSolve it like an equation, one balanced move at a time: .
collect xMove the -terms to one side and the numbers to the other: .
÷ negative → flipDivide both sides by — it's negative, so flip the inequality sign: .
test a value:  x =

is not in the solution ✗

-4-3-2-1012345-23
splitBreak the compound into two:  and  .
all three partsDo every operation to all three parts at once (flip a part only if you multiply or divide it by a negative).
intersectKeep the values that satisfy both: .
test a value:  x =

is in the solution ✓

Solve for :  

Write the answer as a range of x — like x < 6, x >= -4 (≤/≥ ok too), or a compound like -2 <= x < 3. If every value works, answer "all"; if none do, answer "none".

Correct: 0Attempts: 0Streak: 0Best: 0