Answer is as follows-
Let's analyze Marcus' steps and then correct the error:
Marcus' steps:
Step 1: \( w = 4.34 \)
Step 2: (No additional steps provided, assuming he concluded here)
Step 3: \( w = 4.34 \)
Error analysis:
Marcus' error occurred in Step 2 where he concluded the solution without performing any operations to isolate \( w \). In algebra, solving typically involves isolating the variable of interest by performing operations to both sides of the equation until the variable is alone on one side.
Correct approach:
Given the equation:
\[ w = 4.34 \]
To solve for \( w \), there's actually no error in Marcus' final conclusion (Step 3), because \( w = 4.34 \) is a correct solution to the equation given. However, if we were to assume there was an error in not showing intermediate steps, let's explicitly state the correct solving process:
1. Start with the equation:
\[ w = 4.34 \]
2. There are no further operations needed to isolate \( w \) since it is already isolated. Therefore, \( w = 4.34 \) is indeed the correct and final solution.
So, based on the given information and Marcus' work, the correct solution to the equation \( w = 4.34 \) is \( w = 4.34 \). If we interpret the question as identifying the error in not showing intermediate steps, we could say Marcus didn't show the steps of isolating \( w \) explicitly, but the final answer itself is correct.
Exhilerated to help
Shubham Ghosh
MIT
