Is the above relation a function?

  • Thread starter Thread starter aisha
  • Start date Start date
  • Tags Tags
    Function Relation
AI Thread Summary
The discussion centers on determining whether a given relation represented by a graph is a function. Participants emphasize using the Vertical Line Test, which states that if a vertical line intersects the graph at more than one point, it is not a function. Based on the provided graph, it is concluded that the relation fails this test, indicating it is not a function. Additionally, the inverse of the relation is also deemed not to be a function, as it would similarly fail the horizontal line test after rotation. Overall, both the original relation and its inverse do not qualify as functions.
aisha
Messages
584
Reaction score
0
X X X
X
X
X
X
X

X X X

These are the points on my graph. The question says is the above relation a function? I think this is a function, but I don't know how to justify my answer.

Also it says is the inverse of this a function? How do I know? I am thinking no because f(x) is already a function so it won't pass the horizontal line test, therefore the inverse will not be a function.?? Help me out please. :confused:
 
Physics news on Phys.org
The Vertical Line test. If you can draw a vertical line through any point in the graph and it goes through two points, it's not a function. Otherwise, it IS a function. From your graph, it looks like it isn't a function since drawing a vertical line would result in more than one y result.

Also, judging from your graph, when you rotate it 90 degrees and use the vertical line test, it should also fail, meaning that both the function and its inverse aren't functions.
 
phreak said:
The Vertical Line test. If you can draw a vertical line through any point in the graph and it goes through two points, it's not a function. Otherwise, it IS a function. From your graph, it looks like it isn't a function since drawing a vertical line would result in more than one y result.

Also, judging from your graph, when you rotate it 90 degrees and use the vertical line test, it should also fail, meaning that both the function and its inverse aren't functions.

Thanks I got it. :smile:
 
TL;DR Summary: I came across this question from a Sri Lankan A-level textbook. Question - An ice cube with a length of 10 cm is immersed in water at 0 °C. An observer observes the ice cube from the water, and it seems to be 7.75 cm long. If the refractive index of water is 4/3, find the height of the ice cube immersed in the water. I could not understand how the apparent height of the ice cube in the water depends on the height of the ice cube immersed in the water. Does anyone have an...
Thread 'Variable mass system : water sprayed into a moving container'
Starting with the mass considerations #m(t)# is mass of water #M_{c}# mass of container and #M(t)# mass of total system $$M(t) = M_{C} + m(t)$$ $$\Rightarrow \frac{dM(t)}{dt} = \frac{dm(t)}{dt}$$ $$P_i = Mv + u \, dm$$ $$P_f = (M + dm)(v + dv)$$ $$\Delta P = M \, dv + (v - u) \, dm$$ $$F = \frac{dP}{dt} = M \frac{dv}{dt} + (v - u) \frac{dm}{dt}$$ $$F = u \frac{dm}{dt} = \rho A u^2$$ from conservation of momentum , the cannon recoils with the same force which it applies. $$\quad \frac{dm}{dt}...
Back
Top