MHB Mathopolis: Transforming Function Qs

  • Thread starter Thread starter caligari
  • Start date Start date
  • Tags Tags
    Function
AI Thread Summary
The discussion centers around confusion regarding the transformation of a function into a specific form, particularly the expression (x + 4)² + 2(x + 4). Participants seek clarification on the reasoning behind this transformation compared to the standard quadratic form x² + 2x + 4. There is a specific inquiry about the presence of three instances of (x + 4) in the expression, which leads to further questions about the explanation provided. The conversation highlights a need for clearer understanding of function transformations and their representations. Overall, the thread emphasizes the importance of comprehending mathematical rules and their applications.
caligari
Messages
2
Reaction score
0
Mathopolis Question Database

I was wondering why this function was this answer and not X^2+2x+4 and why it is in the form that it is. Is it just some rule that you put it in that form? In the answer given, (x + 4)2 + 2(x + 4) , I don't understand how you get 3 different (x+4). Even though the answer is right there and it explains it I still don't get it. X^2+2x+4 makes sense to me.
 
Mathematics news on Phys.org
Which question number are you talking about?

caligari said:
In the answer given, (x + 4)2 + 2(x + 4) , I don't understand how you get 3 different (x+4).
Where do you see three different $(x+4)$ in $(x + 4)^2 + 2(x + 4)$?

caligari said:
Even though the answer is right there and it explains it
What exactly explains it?
 
Thread 'Video on imaginary numbers and some queries'
Hi, I was watching the following video. I found some points confusing. Could you please help me to understand the gaps? Thanks, in advance! Question 1: Around 4:22, the video says the following. So for those mathematicians, negative numbers didn't exist. You could subtract, that is find the difference between two positive quantities, but you couldn't have a negative answer or negative coefficients. Mathematicians were so averse to negative numbers that there was no single quadratic...
Thread 'Unit Circle Double Angle Derivations'
Here I made a terrible mistake of assuming this to be an equilateral triangle and set 2sinx=1 => x=pi/6. Although this did derive the double angle formulas it also led into a terrible mess trying to find all the combinations of sides. I must have been tired and just assumed 6x=180 and 2sinx=1. By that time, I was so mindset that I nearly scolded a person for even saying 90-x. I wonder if this is a case of biased observation that seeks to dis credit me like Jesus of Nazareth since in reality...
Thread 'Imaginary Pythagoras'
I posted this in the Lame Math thread, but it's got me thinking. Is there any validity to this? Or is it really just a mathematical trick? Naively, I see that i2 + plus 12 does equal zero2. But does this have a meaning? I know one can treat the imaginary number line as just another axis like the reals, but does that mean this does represent a triangle in the complex plane with a hypotenuse of length zero? Ibix offered a rendering of the diagram using what I assume is matrix* notation...
Back
Top