Question 907441
<font face="Times New Roman" size="+2">


Let's begin with a lesson on precision in terminology.  An intercept is NOT a number, it is a point that is defined by an ordered pair.  An *[tex \Large x]-intercept is an ordered pair of the form *[tex \Large (a,0)].  Hence, saying that the *[tex \Large x]-intercept is *[tex \Large -8] is imprecise.  Correctly stated, the *[tex \Large x]-intercept is *[tex \Large (-8,0)]. Likewise, your *[tex \Large y]-intercept is correctly stated as *[tex \Large (0,-1)]


Now you can use the two-point form of the equation of a straight line to derive the desired equation:


*[tex \LARGE \ \ \ \ \ \ \ \ \ \ y\ -\ y_1\ =\ \left(\frac{y_1\ -\ y_2}{x_1\ -\ x_2}\right)(x\ -\ x_1) ]


where *[tex \Large \left(x_1,y_1\right)] and *[tex \Large \left(x_2,y_2\right)] are the coordinates of the given points.


Just plug in the numbers and perform the indicated operation.  In order to rearrange the equation into the desired slope-intercept form, solve the equation for *[tex \Large y] in terms of *[tex \Large x] using standard algebraic manipulation of linear equations.


John
*[tex \LARGE e^{i\pi}\ +\ 1\ =\ 0]
My calculator said it, I believe it, that settles it
<div style="text-align:center"><a href="http://outcampaign.org/" target="_blank">
<img src="http://cdn.cloudfiles.mosso.com/c116811/scarlet_A.png" border="0" alt="The Out Campaign: Scarlet Letter of Atheism" width="143" height="122" /></a></div>