Solving linear inequalities is almost exactly like solving linear equations.

Solve x

+ 3 < 0.

If they'd given me "x + 3 = 0", I'd have known how to solve: I would have subtracted
sides. I can do the same thing here:

3 from both

Then the solution is:

x < 3

The formatting of the above answer is called "inequality notation", because the solution is written as an
inequality. This is probably the simplest of the solution notations, but there are three others with which you
might need to be familiar
"Set notation" writes the solution as a set of points. The above solution would be written in set notation as
"{x | xis a real number, x
< 3}", which is pronounced as "the set of allx-values, such that x is a real number, and x is less than
minus three". The simpler form of this notation would be something like " {x | x
< 3}", which is pronounced as "all x such thatx is less than minus three".
"Interval notation" writes the solution as an interval (that is, as a section or length along the number line).
The above solution, "x < 3", would be written as "
", which is pronounced as "the interval from
negative infinity to minus three", or just "minus infinity to minus three". Interval notation is easier to write
than to pronounce, because of the ambiguity regarding whether or not the endpoints are included in the
interval. (To denote, for instance, "x < 3", the interval would be written "
", which would be
pronounced as "minus infinity through (not just "to") minus three" or "minus infinity to minus three,
inclusive", meaning that 3 would be included. The right-parenthesis in the " x < 3" case indicated that
the 3 was not included; the right-bracket in the "x < 3" case indicates that it is.)

The last "notation" is more of an illustration. You may be directed to "graph" the solution. This means that
you would draw the number line, and then highlight the portion that is included in the solution. First, you
would mark off the edge of the solution interval, in this case being 3. Since 3 is not included in the
solution (this is a "less than", remember, not a "less than or equal to"), you would mark this point with an
open dot or with an open parenthesis pointing in the direction of the rest of the solution interval:

...or:

Then you would shade in the appropriate side:

...or:

Why shade to the left? Because they want all the values that are less than3, and those values are to the
left of the boundary point. If they had wanted the "greater than" points, you would have shaded to the
right.
In all, we have seen four ways, with a couple variants, to denote the solution to the above inequality:
notation

format

pronunciation

inequality

x < 3

x is less than minus three

i) {x | x is a real number, x <

set

...or:
ii) {x | x < 3}

interval

3}

i) the set of all x, such that x is a real

number and xis less than minus three
ii) all x such that x is less than minus three

the interval from minus infinity to minus three

either of the following graphs:

graph

Here is another example, along with the different answer formats:

Solvex

4 > 0.

If they'd given me "x

same here:

4 = 0", then I would have solved by adding four to each side. I can do the

Then the solution is: x

>4

Just as before, this solution can be presented in any of the four following ways:
notation

format

pronunciation

inequality

x>4

x is greater than or equal to four

i) {x | x is a real number, x > 4}

...or:

set

i) the set of all x, such that

x is a real number, and
x is greater than or equal to four
ii) all x such that x is
greater than or equal to four

ii) {x | x> 4}

the interval from four to infinity,

inclusive of four

interval

either of the following graphs:

graph

Regarding the graphs of the solution, the square bracket notation goes with the parenthesis notation, and
the closed (filled in) dot notation goes with the open dot notation. While your present textbook may require
that you know only one or two of the above formats for your answers, this topic of inequalities tends to
arise in other contexts in other books for other courses. Since you may need later to be able to
understand the other formats, make sure now that you know them all. However, for the rest of this lesson,
I'll use only the "inequality" notation; I like it best.

Solve2x

< 9.

If they had given me "2x = 9", I would have divided the

here:

Then the solution is: x

< 9/2

2 from each side. I can do the same thing

...or, if you prefer decimals (and if your instructor will accept decimal equivalents instead of
fractions):

x < 4.5

Solve

/4 > 1/2.

If they had given me "

here:

Then the solution is: x

>2

Solve 2x

/4 = 1/2 ", I would have multiplied both sides by 4. I can do the same thing

< 5.

Remember how I said that solving linear inequalities is "almost" exactly like solving linear
equations? Well, this is the one place where it's different. To explain what I'm about to do,
consider the following: Copyright Elizabeth Stapel 2002-2011 All Rights Reserved

3>2
What happens to the above inequality when I multiply through by 1? The temptation is to say
that the answer will be "3 > 2". But 3 is not greater than 2; it is in actuality smaller. That is,
the correct inequality is actually the following:

3 < 2
As you can see, multiplying by a negative (" 1", in this case) flipped the inequality sign from
"greater than" to "less than". This is the new wrinkle for solving inequalities:
When solving inequalities, if you multiply or divide through by a negative, you
must also flip the inequality sign.
To solve "2x
inequality:

< 5", I need to divide through by a negative ("2"), so I will need to flip the

Then the solution is: x

> 5/2

Solve

(2x 3)

/4 < 2.

First, I'll multiply through by 4. Since the "4" is positive, I don't have to flip the inequality sign:
(2x 3)

/4 < 2

(4) (2x 3)/4 < (4)(2)

2x 3 < 8
2x < 11
x < 11/2 = 5.5

2. Solving Linear Inequalities

The procedure for solving linear inequalities in one variable is similar to
solving basic equations. (SeeSolving Equations.)
We need to be careful about the sense of the equality when multiplying or
dividing by negative numbers.
Following are several examples of solving equations involving inequalities.
Example 1

Solve x + 2 < 4
Answer
We need to subtract 2 from both sides of the inequality.

x+2<4
x<42
x<2
Example 2

Solve 2x>4
Answer

We need to multiply both sides of the inequality by 2.

2x>4
x>42
x>8
Example 3

Solve 2x 4
Answer
We need to divide both sides of the inequality by 2.

2x4
x24
x2
Example 4

Solve the inequality 3 2x 15

Answer
In this example, we need to subtract 3 from both sides; then divide both sides
by 2 (remembering to change the direction of the inequality).

32x15
2x153
2x12

x212
x6
(Note the change in sense due to dividing by a negative number)
Check: Always check your solution and you can be sure your answer is
correct.
In this case, any number less than 6 should "work" in the original equation,
and any number bigger than 6 should fail.
Let's take x=10 (a convenient number less than 6)
LHS =32(10)=3+20=23. This is more than 15 so it is true.
Now let's take x=0 (a convenient number greater than 6)
LHS =32(0)=3. This is NOT more than 15, which is what we hoped for.
So we can be sure our answer is correct.
Get the Daily Math Tweet!
IntMath on Twitter

Example 5

Solve the inequality 23(1x)>41x

Answer

23(1x)>41x
Multiplying both sides by 4 gives us:

6(1x)>14x

66x>14x
6x+4x>16
2x>5
x<25
(Note the change in sense in the last line, due to dividing by a negative
number).
Check: Taking x = 0 (which should work):

LHS=23(10)=23
RHS=41
It is TRUE that 23>41, so that is good.
Now we take x = 3 (a convenient number bigger than 5/2, which should not
work):

LHS=23(13)=3
RHS=413=243
It is NOT true that 3>243 and so x=3 fails, as we hoped.
We can be sure our answer (x<25) is correct.
http://www.intmath.com/inequalities/2-solving-linear-inequalities.php