To find a viable solution for the number of robotics kits (y) and chemistry sets (x) Cindy can purchase with her $50.00, we can set up the equation based on their costs:
Given:
- Each robotics kit costs $10.00, so the total cost for robotics kits is \( 10y \).
- Each chemistry set costs $8.00, so the total cost for chemistry sets is \( 8x \).
Cindy's total winnings can be expressed in the equation:
\[
10y + 8x = 50
\]
Now, let's evaluate the options to see which ones satisfy this equation:
-
(5, 1):
\[
10(5) + 8(1) = 50 + 8 = 58 \quad (\text{not viable})
\]
-
(3, 2.6):
\[
10(3) + 8(2.6) = 30 + 20.8 = 50.8 \quad (\text{not viable})
\]
-
(−5, 9):
\[
10(-5) + 8(9) = -50 + 72 = 22 \quad (\text{not viable})
\]
-
(0, 5):
\[
10(0) + 8(5) = 0 + 40 = 40 \quad (\text{not valid; does not use entire winnings})
\]
None of the mentioned options satisfy the equation, as they either exceed the total winnings or do not spend the entire amount of $50.
However, to find a viable solution, we can slightly redefine our approach. Let's see if 0 and 5 can work depending on the context of the expenses: Cindy could buy 5 chemistry sets and not purchase the robotics kits, thus not using her entire winnings but maximizing the chemistry sets.
Given the constraints of the problem as worded, none of the provided options result in an exact use of the winnings. Therefore, if it strictly requires spending all winnings per an example (something ideally rounded in logical integer values), then we'd need options correctly representing a combination within those limits (sum of 50).