MHB Cubic Transformations - Graph shown is best represented by the equation:

confusedatmath
Messages
14
Reaction score
0
View attachment 1901
View attachment 1902

I am confused about using horizontal transformations such as

f(x+a) and f(x-a) to interpret these graphs.
 

Attachments

  • Screen Shot 2014-02-02 at 2.18.37 pm.png
    Screen Shot 2014-02-02 at 2.18.37 pm.png
    8.2 KB · Views: 93
  • Screen Shot 2014-02-02 at 2.18.43 pm.png
    Screen Shot 2014-02-02 at 2.18.43 pm.png
    11.3 KB · Views: 94
Mathematics news on Phys.org
confusedatmath said:
<snip>

I am confused about using horizontal transformations such as

f(x+a) and f(x-a) to interpret these graphs.

A rule of thumb I use to work out horizontal translations is that the graph moves along the x-axis in the opposite direction to the sign in the function. That is $$f(x+a)$$ moves $$a$$ units to the left (-ve) and $$f(x-a)$$ moves $$a$$ units to the right (+ve).

You can verify the direction by plugging values in and seeing what happens. Your example is a cubic so suppose we have the "base" function $$f(x) = x^3$$. It is pretty clear that $$f(x) = 0 \text{ when } x = 0$$. Now suppose we have $$f(x-4)$$ (where a=4). This translation is shifted 4 units to the right according to the previous paragraph and $$f(x-4) = 0 \text{ when } x-4 = 0 \therefore x=4$$ which is 4 units to the right of 0.

Let me know if you meant something elseedit: If I take your first example the point (a,b) is to the left of 0 on the x-axis so it'll be which sign inside the function
+. Giving us (x+a)^3
 
But the answer is f(x)=-(x-a)^3 +b ...
 
confusedatmath said:
But the answer is f(x)=-(x-a)^3 +b ...

That doesn't make sense to me. I tried it with a graph in wolfram showing the graphs of $$f(x) = -(x+5)^2 \text{ with } g(x) = -x^3$$ for comparison and the graph of f(x) is shifted 5 units left compared to g(x).
 
The first thing you should notice is that when x= a, y= b. Since all of the options have "+ b", the cubic portion must be 0 when x= a so those that have "x+ a" are impossible. That eliminates D and E.

The second thing you should notice is that the usual x^3 is reversed- this graph rises to the left, not the right. That means x is swapped for -x. Since we are using "x- a" instead of x, we must have -(x- a)^3 which is the same as (a- x)^3. That eliminates A leaving B and C which are identical.
 
Last edited by a moderator:
so we sub x=a because in the graph it says (a,b)

what if the question said (-a,b) ??
 
Insights auto threads is broken atm, so I'm manually creating these for new Insight articles. In Dirac’s Principles of Quantum Mechanics published in 1930 he introduced a “convenient notation” he referred to as a “delta function” which he treated as a continuum analog to the discrete Kronecker delta. The Kronecker delta is simply the indexed components of the identity operator in matrix algebra Source: https://www.physicsforums.com/insights/what-exactly-is-diracs-delta-function/ by...
Fermat's Last Theorem has long been one of the most famous mathematical problems, and is now one of the most famous theorems. It simply states that the equation $$ a^n+b^n=c^n $$ has no solutions with positive integers if ##n>2.## It was named after Pierre de Fermat (1607-1665). The problem itself stems from the book Arithmetica by Diophantus of Alexandria. It gained popularity because Fermat noted in his copy "Cubum autem in duos cubos, aut quadratoquadratum in duos quadratoquadratos, et...
I'm interested to know whether the equation $$1 = 2 - \frac{1}{2 - \frac{1}{2 - \cdots}}$$ is true or not. It can be shown easily that if the continued fraction converges, it cannot converge to anything else than 1. It seems that if the continued fraction converges, the convergence is very slow. The apparent slowness of the convergence makes it difficult to estimate the presence of true convergence numerically. At the moment I don't know whether this converges or not.

Similar threads

Back
Top