![]() |
[/B][/QUOTE] Not quite. I posted this because of the whole switch/reverse issue which Mark T. DeNucci brought up. In this case, I'm a huge stickler for saying f of x is equal to the opposite of x. Long night last night . . . [/B][/QUOTE] Man, I thought I was the only one that made a point of this! I think it came from my algebra teacher in high school. He was known to go off like Sam Kennison if you called -x "negative x," or god forbid, "minus x!" |
Quote:
|
[QUOTE]Originally posted by Mark Dexter
Quote:
Chuck |
Quote:
In the end, it matters about as much as "switching" or "reversing" the arrow :D. |
The reason that I have been silent on this thread is that we were without electricity from 01:00pmEST, Jan. 31st, until 04:35amEST, Feb. 02nd. Having said that let me jump into the fray.
f(x) means: A function in terms of x. I know that is the obvious. We could aslo write f(x) = -x as: f(x) = y = -x. Going with f(x) = -x, it means that for a given value of x = A, f(x = A) = -A. The plot of f(x) = -x, is a straight line with a slope of -1. The standard equation for a straight line is y = mx + b, where m is the slope of the line and b is the y-intercept at x = 0. So the value of f(0) = 0. I do not remember who wrote that his algebra teacher did not like calling -x: negative x or minus x. I can understand not calling it minus x, but negative x it quite acceptable. On the other hand F(x) = 3 - x would be read as three minus x, but could also be written and F(x) = 3 + (-x), which would be read as three plus negative x. But in either case the mathematical sentence says the same thing. Just remember, I thing Mark Dexter started this nonsense. |
Quote:
(However, I should know better than to argue with an engineer!) |
Quote:
|
All times are GMT -5. The time now is 11:14am. |