Luella drew the triangle shown on a coordinate grid. To find the triangle’s area, she multiplies 1/2 by 2 and then multiplies the result by another number. What is the number Luella can use to complete the calculation? (1 point) Luella can multiply 1/2 by 2 by to find the triangle’s area.

A 8, 2
B 6, 4
C 8, 10

3 answers

To find the area of a triangle on a coordinate grid, you can use the formula:

\[ \text{Area} = \frac{1}{2} \times \text{base} \times \text{height} \]

In Luella's method, she multiplies \( \frac{1}{2} \) by \( 2 \), which could represent the \( \frac{1}{2} \) from the area formula, and \( 2 \) could represent the base of the triangle, assuming the height is involved in the next multiplication.

To complete the calculation, Luella needs to multiply the result of \( \frac{1}{2} \times 2 = 1 \) by the height of the triangle.

Looking at the answer choices provided:

  • For option A, \( 8 \) and \( 2 \), we can check if \( 1 \times \text{height} \) could equal \( \text{area} \):
  • For option B, \( 6 \) and \( 4 \):
  • For option C, \( 8 \) and \( 10 \):

Assuming heights \( 4, 2, \) and \( 10 \) in relation to the provided areas, the height that helps to calculate an area consistent with common geometric principles could be determined.

To find a proper context for Luella's steps, we can consider triangle values quickly.

If we interpreted \( 2 \) as the base, the complementary height might be \( 4 \), since \( \frac{1}{2} \times 2 \times 4 = 4 \).

Thus the answer \( \boxed{4} \) aligns with the option structure hinting that option B could underline correct numbers yielding a result consistent with triangle area investigations:

The complete option considered is:

B: 6, 4 correspondingly assuming among available dimensions, yielding calculative area standards:

  1. Pick up 4 as height setting base-area calculations justified on foundational geometry.
it says that that answer is wrong

I apologize for the confusion. Let's clarify the problem step-by-step.

Luella is finding the area of a triangle, and she has used the formula for area:

\[ \text{Area} = \frac{1}{2} \times \text{base} \times \text{height} \]

From the information given in the question, she multiplied \( \frac{1}{2} \) by \( 2 \).

This means:

\[ \frac{1}{2} \times 2 = 1 \]

Now, the area of the triangle would be \( 1 \) (from multiplying \( \frac{1}{2} \) and \( 2 \)) multiplied by the height of the triangle to find the area.

So she needs another number to complete her calculation, which represents another dimension in context (height) alongside the base \( 2 \).

To reach the area of a triangle, she needs to multiply the result of \( 1 \) with a height. If we consider the option available:

  • A \( (8, 2) \) - height \( 8 \)
  • B \( (6, 4) \) - height \( 4 \)
  • C \( (8, 10) \) - height \( 10 \)

For the area calculations:

  1. If \( \text{height} = 2 \), area is \( 1 \times 2 = 2 \)
  2. If \( \text{height} = 4 \), area is \( 1 \times 4 = 4 \)
  3. If \( \text{height} = 10 \), area is \( 1 \times 10 = 10 \)

Assuming the maximum possible area and seeking known contextual triangles represented correctly:

Assuming a height that could yield \( 4 \) multiplied by \( 2 \) was deemed incorrect. However, if the height needed should be two times \( 4 \), which could align towards \( 8, 2 \) or \( 6, 4 \).

With corrected emphasis leading towards maximum triangle area ratios, let’s settle on the height aligning according to \( 1 \) appearing to tie towards:

From proportionality across y-axis terms, series \( 1 \times height = highest value \) hence correctly doubled and simpler:

If we address needing clarification based on upholding foundational \((8)\) to balance \( 2 \):

Therefore, the triangle incorporated towards final calculations could infer the basis height would ideally yield maximum logical endemic:

I suggest Option C: 8, 10 representing broad structured areas logically fitting criteria which could re-evaluate by crucial limits appear high within horizontal engagement should balance.