Linearity of Functions on Different Graphs

Click For Summary

Homework Help Overview

The discussion revolves around the behavior of functions when represented on different types of graphs, specifically focusing on linearity in log-log graphs versus regular scale graphs. Participants explore the implications of scaling on the appearance of functions such as linear, exponential, and polynomial forms.

Discussion Character

  • Conceptual clarification, Assumption checking, Exploratory

Approaches and Questions Raised

  • Participants discuss the relationship between linearity on log-log graphs and other graph types, questioning whether a function's appearance remains consistent across different scales. They explore the mathematical representation of functions and express confusion regarding the implications of scaling on the function's form.

Discussion Status

There is an active exploration of ideas, with participants sharing their thoughts and questioning each other's reasoning. Some participants express uncertainty about their understanding of log-log scales and how they affect the representation of functions. Guidance is offered in the form of clarifications about the mathematical forms of functions and their graphical representations.

Contextual Notes

Participants mention the need to consider how logarithmic scaling impacts the interpretation of function behavior, indicating a potential misunderstanding of log-log scales and their effects on graph appearance.

nobahar
Messages
482
Reaction score
2
Am I correct to say that a function that is linear on a log-log graph is also linear when it is plotted on a graph using regular scales on both axes, takes a square root form when plotted with the x-axis scaled regularly and the y-axis with a log scale, and exponential in appearance whn the x-axis is log and the y-axis is regular?
This is based on 'intuition', for want of a better word. How would I represent this mathematically?
 
Physics news on Phys.org
Hi nobahar! :smile:
nobahar said:
Am I correct to say that a function that is linear on a log-log graph is also linear when it is plotted on a graph using regular scales on both axes …

Nooo :redface: … if logy = Alogx + B, then y = … ? :wink:
 
Hi Tiny Tim!
Haven't had a response from you for a while!

y = x^a + 10^b

10^b is a constant, say, 10^b = C.

Then y = x^a + C

So it's exponential.

What confuses me is that if I had a y = mx + c function, then this would be a straight line. If I altered both axes so that they increase by the same increments, say 10^1, 10^2, 10^3, etc., then the graph should still appear straight, shouldn't it? After all, the m value hasn't changed, nor the c value, and the two axes have been altered by the same scale. I think I've misunderstood how a log-log scale works...
 
Hi nobahar! :smile:

I've been swimming around in my little bowl, keeping an eye on the world! :wink:
nobahar said:
y = x^a + C

No, it's y = Cxa.
What confuses me is that if I had a y = mx + c function, then this would be a straight line. If I altered both axes so that they increase by the same increments, say 10^1, 10^2, 10^3, etc., then the graph should still appear straight, shouldn't it? After all, the m value hasn't changed, nor the c value, and the two axes have been altered by the same scale. I think I've misunderstood how a log-log scale works...

hmm …

y = mx would be a straight line (at 45º), but y = mx + c would be slightly curved.

You're just going to have to think about this some more. :smile:
 
Sorry!

To show that I've made an effort to understand why it is y = Cx^a:

\log{y} = a.\log{x} + b \left \left then \left \left y = 10^{a.\log{x} + b}

y = 10^{a.\log{x}} * 10^b = (10^{\log{x}})^a * 10^b = x^a * 10^b

and since 10^b is a constant

If \left \left 10^b = C, then \left \left y = x^a * C = Cx^a

I think I understand what you mean by slightly curved: the +C component will make 'less and less of a contribution' to the appearance of the graph moving along the x-axis because the evenly spaced intervals actually increase by some factor, and the contirbution by the +C component is much less, erm, 'noticeable'.

I think I understand the idea of log-log scales now: If a function takes the form of a straight line on a log-log scale, it allows you to use the y = mx + c formula to deduce the equation of a line. I also failed to consider that the log scale would mean that each point was the log of the variable! It doesn't just make the scale more compact, it has to be taken into consideration for the value in the equation!
I'm slightly worried about my brain right now...

Thanks Tiny Tim!

Feel free to correct and/or improve my understanding.
 

Similar threads

Replies
7
Views
2K
  • · Replies 6 ·
Replies
6
Views
13K
Replies
3
Views
2K
  • · Replies 4 ·
Replies
4
Views
3K
  • · Replies 4 ·
Replies
4
Views
3K
  • · Replies 1 ·
Replies
1
Views
1K
  • · Replies 5 ·
Replies
5
Views
3K
  • · Replies 14 ·
Replies
14
Views
3K
Replies
17
Views
3K
  • · Replies 1 ·
Replies
1
Views
1K