You are not logged in.
HI;
f(g(x)) = g(x) + 4
Now we replace that g(x) with x + 1 because g(x) = x + 1.
f(x+1) = x+1 + 4
See how each g(x) was replaced by a x+1?
Yes. the x from f(x) is replaced with the equation of g(x)!
Offline
Now use some algebra to clean that up a little.
f(x+1) = x+1 + 4
Simplifying often just means combining things together. Well the 1 + 4 is 5 so that means we can simplify that to.
f(x+1) = x+5
We are done!
In mathematics, you don't understand things. You just get used to them.
If it ain't broke, fix it until it is.
Always satisfy the Prime Directive of getting the right answer above all else.
Offline
Now use some algebra to clean that up a little.
f(x+1) = x+1 + 4
Simplifying often just means combining things together. Well the 1 + 4 is 5 so that means we can simplify that to.
f(x+1) = x+5
We are done!
Ahh I get it now! YESS!:)
Offline
Okay, I am taking a little break for 20 minutes, I will see you then.
In mathematics, you don't understand things. You just get used to them.
If it ain't broke, fix it until it is.
Always satisfy the Prime Directive of getting the right answer above all else.
Offline
Okay.
Last edited by BlitzBall (2012-01-18 02:51:30)
Offline
Can you do another one?
In mathematics, you don't understand things. You just get used to them.
If it ain't broke, fix it until it is.
Always satisfy the Prime Directive of getting the right answer above all else.
Offline
Can you do another one?
I will do another for myself and see how I will go. I have to study for another module. So, for now, you can relax
Offline
Hi;
Okay, then I will see you later. Let me know how you do.
In mathematics, you don't understand things. You just get used to them.
If it ain't broke, fix it until it is.
Always satisfy the Prime Directive of getting the right answer above all else.
Offline
I'm back. Great news! I think I understand this! However, I have a few problems that I want to clear up on. In the composition functions, Say you have f(x) = 2x and g(x) = x+8.
For g and g... I get (x+8)+8. In this situation, would you have to multiply both 8's or add them?
Also, for inverse function. Is 3x+2 the same as 3(x+2) ???
Offline
Hi
For g and g... I get (x+8)+8. In this situation, would you have to multiply both 8's or add them
You did the composition correctly, now you add the eights.
For the second question:
3x+ 2 is not the same as 3(x+2). 3(x+2) means multiply everything in the parentheses by 3. So you get:
3x + 3(2) = 3x + 6
In mathematics, you don't understand things. You just get used to them.
If it ain't broke, fix it until it is.
Always satisfy the Prime Directive of getting the right answer above all else.
Offline
Hi
For g and g... I get (x+8)+8. In this situation, would you have to multiply both 8's or add them
You did the composition correctly, now you add the eights.
For the second question:
3x+ 2 is not the same as 3(x+2). 3(x+2) means multiply everything in the parentheses by 3. So you get:
3x + 3(2) = 3x + 6
Hmm... I see. Heres an example, y-2/4, I get 4(x+2), but the answer is 4x+2. Am I missing something?
Offline
Hi;
I am not following you, what is y - 2/4 ?
In mathematics, you don't understand things. You just get used to them.
If it ain't broke, fix it until it is.
Always satisfy the Prime Directive of getting the right answer above all else.
Offline
Hi;
I am not following you, what is y - 2/4 ?
Ohhh I forgot. I meant inversing y-2/4.
Offline
Hi;
You need another variable. Are we talking about x = y - 2 / 4 ?
In mathematics, you don't understand things. You just get used to them.
If it ain't broke, fix it until it is.
Always satisfy the Prime Directive of getting the right answer above all else.
Offline
Hi;
You need another variable. Are we talking about x = y - 2 / 4 ?
Yes yes. I forgot that:|
Offline
Times both sides by 4.
Are you okay up to here?
In mathematics, you don't understand things. You just get used to them.
If it ain't broke, fix it until it is.
Always satisfy the Prime Directive of getting the right answer above all else.
Offline
Yup
Offline
The left side becomes 4x, on the right side the four on top cancels the one on the bottom and we are left with this:
Okay?
In mathematics, you don't understand things. You just get used to them.
If it ain't broke, fix it until it is.
Always satisfy the Prime Directive of getting the right answer above all else.
Offline
Yep. I understood that
Offline
We are trying to get the y by itself. If that -2 were gone we would have it all alone. The inverse operation to subtraction is addition. So we add 2 to both sides.
Okay, up to here?
In mathematics, you don't understand things. You just get used to them.
If it ain't broke, fix it until it is.
Always satisfy the Prime Directive of getting the right answer above all else.
Offline
Yes. but wouldn't the +2 on the left hand-side be 2 + 4x ??
Offline
Yes, but addition does not care what goes first. 1 + 3 is the same as 3 + 1. So 2 + 4x is the same as 4x + 2.
In mathematics, you don't understand things. You just get used to them.
If it ain't broke, fix it until it is.
Always satisfy the Prime Directive of getting the right answer above all else.
Offline
Oh right i get that.
Offline
We are up to here:
On the right side we see that we are subtracting 2 and adding 2. This equals 0, so the -2 + 2 equals 0. That leaves us:
We are close!
In mathematics, you don't understand things. You just get used to them.
If it ain't broke, fix it until it is.
Always satisfy the Prime Directive of getting the right answer above all else.
Offline
Yep I got that.
Offline