Hi SanuBest,You landed on
B, but the squaring step is genuinely unsafe, and it is the same concern raised earlier in this thread.
The rule you skipped: you can square both sides of an inequality only when both sides are guaranteed non-negative. Squaring preserves an inequality only when nothing on either side is negative.
Look at the stem, |x - y| > |x| - |y|:
- The left side, |x - y|, is always ≥
0. Fine.
- The right side, |x| - |y|,
can be negative. Take x =
1, y =
2, which gives
-1.
Once the right side can go negative, squaring can flip the truth of the statement.
A counterexample that exposes it:-
3 >
-5 is clearly
true.
- Square both sides:
9 >
25 is clearly
false.
Same illegal move, and it reverses the answer, so the squared version is not an equivalent of the original question.
So why did B still come out? Coincidence. Wherever the right side is negative, the original inequality is automatically true, a non-negative value beating a negative one, and those cases happen not to disturb the xy <
0 boundary your algebra produced. The conclusion survived; the reasoning behind it did not, which is exactly the discomfort you felt.
The safe route is the case-testing used throughout this thread: pick concrete numbers obeying each statement and check whether the yes/no answer can change.
Answer: BSanuBest
I squared the equation and tested it and arrived at the same answer.
Im sure my approach is wrong but not sure why