AdamK
  • AdamK
If I'm given f(x) and g(x) and I need to find h(x) if h(x) = g(f(-x)) what do I do to f(x) for the negative x transformation? f(x) = x^2 and g(x) = (1/3)x - 2
Mathematics
  • Stacey Warren - Expert brainly.com
Hey! We 've verified this expert answer for you, click below to unlock the details :)
SOLVED
At vero eos et accusamus et iusto odio dignissimos ducimus qui blanditiis praesentium voluptatum deleniti atque corrupti quos dolores et quas molestias excepturi sint occaecati cupiditate non provident, similique sunt in culpa qui officia deserunt mollitia animi, id est laborum et dolorum fuga. Et harum quidem rerum facilis est et expedita distinctio. Nam libero tempore, cum soluta nobis est eligendi optio cumque nihil impedit quo minus id quod maxime placeat facere possimus, omnis voluptas assumenda est, omnis dolor repellendus. Itaque earum rerum hic tenetur a sapiente delectus, ut aut reiciendis voluptatibus maiores alias consequatur aut perferendis doloribus asperiores repellat.
schrodinger
  • schrodinger
I got my questions answered at brainly.com in under 10 minutes. Go to brainly.com now for free help!
PhantomCrow
  • PhantomCrow
Do the opposite for every instance of x in f(x). So all x's become negative.
AdamK
  • AdamK
@PhantomCrow So h(x) = 1/3(x^2) - 2 just like f(g(x) would be?
PhantomCrow
  • PhantomCrow
h(x) would be (1/3)(-x^2) +2

Looking for something else?

Not the answer you are looking for? Search for more explanations.

More answers

AdamK
  • AdamK
@PhantomCrow I don't think so. I think because f(x) = x^2, then g(f(-x)) = g(f(x))
PhantomCrow
  • PhantomCrow
if f(x)=x^2 then f(-x)=-x^2. Now replace f(-x) with every instance of x in g(x) to get g(f(x)).
PhantomCrow
  • PhantomCrow
or rather g(f(-x)). Sorry.
AdamK
  • AdamK
@PhantomCrow Why + 2?
PhantomCrow
  • PhantomCrow
Because all your doing when you compose functions is replacing x values. You don't modify constants like +2. +2 was always in g(x). We're interested in replaces all x's in g(x) with f(x) so +2 remains as is.
AdamK
  • AdamK
It was - 2
AdamK
  • AdamK
And I'm still convinced f(-x) = x^2
PhantomCrow
  • PhantomCrow
Ok. What f(-x) is stating is "take my original self and make all my x's negative". f(x)=x^2 so f(-x) would equal -x^2 because we are now taking the negative of all x's values in that function. That is why it is notated as f(x).
PhantomCrow
  • PhantomCrow
And apologies for misinterpreting the 2. -2 remains the same, then.
AdamK
  • AdamK
I have to disagree. That's -f(x).
PhantomCrow
  • PhantomCrow
-f(x) would be multiplying the entire function by -1.
AdamK
  • AdamK
Exactly. That's what you're doing. You're multiplying x^2 by -1 to get -x^2. If it's just multiplying "x" by -1 then it's -x * -x which equals x^2.
PhantomCrow
  • PhantomCrow
In this case, -f(x) happens to equal f(-x). That's just arbitrary, however, and not always the case.
AdamK
  • AdamK
No. It does not. You are wrong.
PhantomCrow
  • PhantomCrow
Actually, I am. I'm terribly sorry. I wasn't making the distinction between (-x)^2 and -(x^2).
PhantomCrow
  • PhantomCrow
f(-x) is indeed x^2.
AdamK
  • AdamK
No problem man. Glad you figured it out. And I'm glad I figured it out :)

Looking for something else?

Not the answer you are looking for? Search for more explanations.