I feel bad I can't understand the most simple of algebra

[symbolipoint]

BadFish,
After rereading some of the earlier posts on this thread, the exact nature of your learning-problem is not clear; I thought someone mentioned that you are stricken with a form of Asperger's Syndrome, but I did not see this mentioned specificly in the earlier posts.
In any case, one may wonder if the actual nature of your book, Algebra the Easy Way, written in medieval story-like manner is actually an obstacke to learning? You wrote that you did very well in Algebra in middle school, but you are having trouble understanding now. Maybe, consider changing books? Use a more traditional book, even if the book is 20 or 30 years old. Used books are sometimes very easy to find, and for very low prices. The old, traditional books require the student to think critically, and let the Mathematics speak for itself; these books are less wordy than what you may currently be using; less words are less distracting. For Beginning Algebra, an older style book might be easier for you to learn from --- just a guess.

 

[BadFish]

BadFish,
After rereading some of the earlier posts on this thread, the exact nature of your learning-problem is not clear; I thought someone mentioned that you are stricken with a form of Asperger's Syndrome, but I did not see this mentioned specificly in the earlier posts.
In any case, one may wonder if the actual nature of your book, Algebra the Easy Way, written in medieval story-like manner is actually an obstacke to learning? You wrote that you did very well in Algebra in middle school, but you are having trouble understanding now. Maybe, consider changing books? Use a more traditional book, even if the book is 20 or 30 years old. Used books are sometimes very easy to find, and for very low prices. The old, traditional books require the student to think critically, and let the Mathematics speak for itself; these books are less wordy than what you may currently be using; less words are less distracting. For Beginning Algebra, an older style book might be easier for you to learn from --- just a guess.

I did very good in algebra in high school, did not do good in geometry in middle school. I have (at least some think so) a minor form of autism called asperger's. I was one of the best in my class in high school in algebra I, and was a math tutor, ironically, at the charter school. It's been many years since I graduated and the main difference was having a teacher around to show me, it makes all the difference. I do well in classrooms with teachers, I do *not* learn well from books. This is across the board, I also have other hobbies such as sleight of hand (magic) with coins which many books such as Bobo's Modern coin magic and for cards, Erdnase is written. I have trouble learning from these books too, understanding the wording and what it means. I do fine on DVD's, but books is something else. I was in special ed english but normal math class...
I feel so stupid right now I can't understand this book.
But I appreciate everyone's patience, if there's one thing I have it's persistence and determination, this isn't going to stop me from learning algebra and beyond.

 

[BadFish]

Yes, but I was confused at first. The usual abbreviation for hours is hr or hrs. I mistook your h to be a variable.

OK, we've beat the one with fixed numbers to death. Now can you work the somewhat more abstract problem that I posed several threads back?

An employee works h hours in a week, and is paid $10 per hour. What is the employee's gross pay for the week? You need two formulas.

$10/hour * h = Gross pay

I know you said you need 2 formulas, but why?

Example
$10 per hour * h (hours in a week)
Say h = 40
$10/per hour * (40)

Can you give me a clue?

 

[symbolipoint]

The clue is that 'h' is a variable. According the the problem description, any time exceeding 40 hours is paid at "time and a half".

Back to your reply in #52, maybe you are using a book not suited to you. Try a traditional Algebra 1 book instead. If you learned Algebra 1 well once, you only have reason to be able to relearn it BETTER than before; not worse than before. Good traditional books are written to express exactly what the author intends to express; no fancy literary tricks. Even so, you usually need to reread several passages many many times and think.
---Hey! I had trouble with high school English, too, when I was in high school; same with social studies. Most of the Mathematics courses were different.

 

[BadFish]

So, we need one formula for the normal rate of pay, (40 hours in a week), and another formula for the overtime pay, 10 hours a weeK?

 

[Ouabache]

So, we need one formula for the normal rate of pay, (40 hours in a week), and another formula for the overtime pay, 10 hours a weeK?

They may be combined into a single equation. Both parts look something like the general form you told me:
Pay = p ($)
Normal Rate of pay = r ($/hr)
time worked = t (hrs)
we chose t rather than h here for a more general construct, since time worked, may be given in weeks, months, etc..
also ( ) indicates the units of the variable

P = r * t

since you are now expecting two parts, one for normal pay and one for overtime pay, you might choose variables r1 and t1 for normal pay and r2 and t2 for overtime pay and the combined form can be:

P = (r1 * t1)+ (r2 * t2)

With the information that you have learned in the practice example, you have enough information to determine
r1 & r2, t1 & t2 in terms of r and t (hint: or a constant)

 

[BadFish]

P = (r1 * t1) + (r2 * t2)

$550 = (10/per hour * 40) + ($15 per hour * 10)

 

[Mark44]

No, you won't get a specific dollar amount.

Ouabache and I took slightly different tacks, where I was asking for two formulas, and he have one formula with two parts.

Let's go with a variation of his formula, with the t variables replaced by h variables -- all of our times are going to be in hours -- and with constants for the regular and overtime pay rates. Note that for the overtime calculation you can multiply the overtime hours by 1.5 OR you can multiply the pay rate by 1.5 (but not both).

P =10*h1 + 15*h2
Here h1 and h2 are the "regular" hours and overtime hours, respectively.

For the problem I posed, where an employee works H hours, at $10 per hour, what's the gross pay for this employee? Your answer should be an expression, not a constant. And there is one question you should ask before you give your answer.

 

[BadFish]

$10/per hour * h = gross pay

 

[BadFish]

No, you won't get a specific dollar amount.

Ouabache and I took slightly different tacks, where I was asking for two formulas, and he have one formula with two parts.

Let's go with a variation of his formula, with the t variables replaced by h variables -- all of our times are going to be in hours -- and with constants for the regular and overtime pay rates. Note that for the overtime calculation you can multiply the overtime hours by 1.5 OR you can multiply the pay rate by 1.5 (but not both).

P =10*h1 + 15*h2
Here h1 and h2 are the "regular" hours and overtime hours, respectively.

For the problem I posed, where an employee works H hours, at $10 per hour, what's the gross pay for this employee? Your answer should be an expression, not a constant. And there is one question you should ask before you give your answer.

Ahh, I see. I was supposed to write it in algebra format.

That makes sense

Let's say p = $550, then
P= 10*(40) + 15(the overtime rate)*10

To get the overtime rate multiply 1.5 x 10 (the normal rate)

 

[Ouabache]

P = (r1 * t1) + (r2 * t2)

$550 = (10/per hour * 40) + ($15 per hour * 10)

As Mark44 mentioned, we are looking for an expression(s), not specific values.
Yes we could have 2 equations with condition on each.
This is actually very useful for the general case, where work is anywhere from 1hr up to some large number.

For your original question:

Calculate your pay if you work more than 40 hours and are paid time and one half for every hour past 40.

for example:
P - pay ($)
r - normal rate of pay ($/hr)
t - time worked (hr)

equ. (1) P = r * t ; amount of pay working < or = 40 hrs
equ. (2) P = (3/2)r * t; amount pay for "only" time worked > 40hrs
Total Pay is sum of equ. (1) and (2)

For your example, we are given the person is working more than 40 hrs.
I suggested we could write this in a combined expression of the form:

equ. (3) P = (r1 * t1) + (r2 * t2)

here are the values I was hoping you would determine from our disussion:
r1 = r (the normal pay rate)
t1 = 40 (maximum normal number of hours)
r2 = (3/2) * r (time and a half; one and half times normal rate)
t2 = t-40 (the number of hours over 40 that have been worked)

Substituting those terms into the combined equation (3)
and you have valid solution to this problem, written in terms of the original r and t.

 

[Mark44]

Ahh, I see. I was supposed to write it in algebra format.

That makes sense

Let's say p = $550, then
P= 10*(40) + 15(the overtime rate)*10

To get the overtime rate multiply 1.5 x 10 (the normal rate)

No, let's not say that P = $550. You are starting with what you assume to be the answer, and as I said before, your answer will not be a specific number.

If the employee works H hours at $10/hour, what is the employee's gross pay?

You need to take into account whether the employee worked overtime hours, and your two formulas should produce algebraic expressions, not numbers, that reflect two situations.