How to express a function as a function of another function?

  • Thread starter Thread starter mnb96
  • Start date Start date
  • Tags Tags
    Function
Click For Summary
To express one function as a function of another, the inverse of the second function can be utilized if it exists. For example, given y = f(x) and z = g(x), one can find y = h(z) by using the inverse x = g⁻¹(z). If the inverse does not exist, it may still be possible to express y in terms of z, although finding an explicit form could be challenging. The discussion highlights that many functions have local inverses, but writing them down can be complex. Overall, the ability to express y as a function of z largely depends on the existence and tractability of the inverse function.
mnb96
Messages
711
Reaction score
5
Hello,

I would like to know how I could approach the following problem. I am given two functions y=f(x) and z=g(x), and I would like to express the first function as a function of the second one: that is, y = h(z), where h is not necessarily a linear function of z.

One explicit example could be: y=\frac{x}{a} z=\frac{x}{a+b}

where the goal is to find a function h such that y=h(z)
 
Mathematics news on Phys.org
hello mnb96! :smile:

invert g (if you can) …

x = g-1(z)

f(x) = f(g-1(z)) :wink:
 
Ups...:)

You are right. When the inverse for g exists, it is pretty easy. Thanks.
I was wondering if it is still possible to do something when an inverse does not exist, although this goes slightly beyond the original question.
 
mnb96 said:
I was wondering if it is still possible to do something when an inverse does not exist, although this goes slightly beyond the original question.

it'd have to be a pretty weird function not to have at least a local inverse :wink:
 
tiny-tim said:
it'd have to be a pretty weird function not to have at least a local inverse :wink:

Indeed... but while they may have a inverse, it may be hard (or even impossible) to write down this inverse function... unless "cheating" is allowed, like using functions like Maple's RootOf( f(x) ) ...
 
coelho said:
Indeed... but while they may have a inverse, it may be hard (or even impossible) to write down this inverse function...

but we can still write it as g-1 :wink:
 
Here is a little puzzle from the book 100 Geometric Games by Pierre Berloquin. The side of a small square is one meter long and the side of a larger square one and a half meters long. One vertex of the large square is at the center of the small square. The side of the large square cuts two sides of the small square into one- third parts and two-thirds parts. What is the area where the squares overlap?

Similar threads

  • · Replies 2 ·
Replies
2
Views
1K
  • · Replies 6 ·
Replies
6
Views
2K
  • · Replies 2 ·
Replies
2
Views
2K
  • · Replies 4 ·
Replies
4
Views
3K
  • · Replies 13 ·
Replies
13
Views
2K
  • · Replies 3 ·
Replies
3
Views
2K
  • · Replies 6 ·
Replies
6
Views
1K
  • · Replies 17 ·
Replies
17
Views
3K
Replies
3
Views
2K
  • · Replies 11 ·
Replies
11
Views
2K