MHB Is the Composition of Functions $F$ and $G$ Correct?

  • Thread starter Thread starter Dustinsfl
  • Start date Start date
AI Thread Summary
The discussion centers on the composition of functions F and G, where F(x) = x + 5 and G(x) = |x|/x for x ≠ 0, with G(0) = 1. There is a debate about the correctness of the composition G(F(x)), with one participant asserting that the definition leads to a conflict when evaluating G at certain points, suggesting it may not define a proper function. Another participant agrees with the initial composition but recommends sticking to the original definitions rather than breaking them down into cases. The conversation concludes with a request for clarification on the graphing commands used.
Dustinsfl
Messages
2,217
Reaction score
5
$F(x) = x + 5\qquad\qquad G(x) = \frac{|x|}{x}, \ \text{if} \ x\neq 0, \ G(0) = 1$

$G(F(x)) = G(x + 5) = \frac{|x + 5|}{x + 5} = \begin{cases}
1 & \text{if} \ x \geq 0\\
-1 & \text{if} \ x\in (0,-5)\cup (-5,\infty)
\end{cases}$

Is the correct for the composition?
 
Mathematics news on Phys.org
I'm not sure I'd quite agree yet. I would do
$$G(F(x))=G(x+5)=\begin{cases}\frac{|x+5|}{x+5}, \quad & x+5\not=0\\
1, \quad & x+5=0\end{cases},$$
and go from there.
 
Ackbach said:
I'm not sure I'd quite agree yet. I would do
$$G(F(x))=G(x+5)=\begin{cases}\frac{|x+5|}{x+5}, \quad & x+5\not=0\\
1, \quad & x+5=0\end{cases},$$
and go from there.

View attachment 325
I just graphed it and it looks right.
 
I agree with Ackbach. Perhaps it would be better if you just worked with the definition of $G$ as given instead of breaking it into exact expressions.
 
dwsmith said:
$F(x) = x + 5\qquad\qquad G(x) = \frac{|x|}{x}, \ \text{if} \ x\neq 0, \ G(0) = 1$

$G(F(x)) = G(x + 5) = \frac{|x + 5|}{x + 5} = \begin{cases}
1 & \text{if} \ x \geq 0\\
-1 & \text{if} \ x\in (0,-5)\cup (-5,\infty)
\end{cases}$

Is the correct for the composition?

Your definition has a conflict in it. Suppose $x=1$. Then it satisfies $x\geq 0$ as well as being in the interval $(-5,\infty)$. So $G \circ F$ would evaluate both to $+1$ and $-1$. Therefore, the composition you have defined there is not a function, but a relation. Either that, or it's an ill-defined function.
 
dwsmith said:
View attachment 325
I just graphed it and it looks right.

What exact commands did you execute to produce this graph?
 
Suppose ,instead of the usual x,y coordinate system with an I basis vector along the x -axis and a corresponding j basis vector along the y-axis we instead have a different pair of basis vectors ,call them e and f along their respective axes. I have seen that this is an important subject in maths My question is what physical applications does such a model apply to? I am asking here because I have devoted quite a lot of time in the past to understanding convectors and the dual...
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...
Back
Top