Recent content by ConstantineO

Alright a little late to the game. I've been a bit busy with work. I hope this is within the realm of acceptability.

I went and redid the graph again. The self-study book I'm using did a rather poor job explaining the graphing section of rational functions. I have been making tables of values and trying to calculate everything up until the point where I watched that youtube walkthrough. I feel extremely...

Well thank you. My less than personable math teacher seemed to have a problem with it, so I am now stuck doing most of my grade 12 calc and functions as self-study courses and it's an uphill battle. I will apologize if I get a bit irritable. Thank you for your help.

Nevermind everybody. This guy explained it beautifully.

I got to tell you that I hate this graphing nonsense. There is virtually no way to check your work and you're taking an estimated "best" guess here. What would the rough sketch look like? This was my attempt. Now my apologize for the messyness we do have some nerve damage in our writing hand...

You won't be able to graph it accurately without knowing k and without having the equation. Simply puking some arbitrary lines onto the graph and claiming that it is the reciprocal is pretty imprecise. This is a math question, not fortune telling. Proof should always be shown.The vertical...

Homework Statement Homework Equations y = f(x) y=k(x+4)(x)(x-6) y=1/f(x) y= 1/ (k(x+4)(x)(x-6)) The Attempt at a Solution I'm more looking for clarification on how people would approach this. There is no explicit point given to deduce the value of k to determine the vertical stretch or...

Your Newtonian and Galilean mechanics won't help you when your math moves from the Euclidean to non-Euclidean realm. All the vector and triangle rules in the world won't help you when your piece of paper or reality can be stretched or compressed like a piece of rubber or can inflate and deflate...

Perfect. You cleared up what you were doing, and I understand now what you were trying to achieve.

Oh I realize that. I am just wondering why he decided to write it like that when you are just creating a ratio in the step that follows. I was just wondering if there was any certain reason that they opted to do this.

Why have you arranged these formulas like this? A google search for me nets that the simple interest formula is Interest = (Principal) (Rate) ( Time) I am going to assume that. Principal = 12298.74 Rate = 0.03 Time would = t-7 Why is there 1 + the Rate? Mathematically speaking it won't do...

I showed the difference when I computed the average rate of change of the non-linear exponential function during the interval 7<x<8. Although the slope is negligible it has a significant enough effect to alter the x value by hundredths of a unit. Of course the linear function based on simplified...

I was on the right track here. There is no need for this graphing nonsense. I forgot a single number which was my "+ 3" in my simple interest formula. I was a fool not to recognize that the lack of a constant would render my simple interest system of equation unsolvable. The lack of anyone...

As I have stated before. I was completely uncertain of what to plot. I am being told to use the simple interest formula, but the two formulas you have provided are compound interest formulas: y = 10000 * (1.03)^x y = 10000 * (1.05)^(x-3) I plotted these long before I even got to this whole...

I am going to assume the two lines would be plotted as y=(12155.0625)(0.05)(x) and y=(12298.73865)(0.03)(x) If that's the case, I don't understand how any human being is supposed to find the point of intersect graphically like this. I did sit down and do it. I have been sitting down and...