- Joined
- Apr 12, 2005
- Messages
- 11,339
No matter what I said, just look at the graph. How many do you count? Still looks like 4.I recall you said there are four intersections
No matter what I said, just look at the graph. How many do you count? Still looks like 4.I recall you said there are four intersections
Sorry, I recall tkhunny said this.There are 4 intersections. Just look at them and count them.
There are an odd number of zeros, counting multiplicities.
I’m confused with the different responses.No matter what I said, just look at the graph. How many do you count? Still looks like 4.
Describe the end behaviorThis depends strongly on what you mean by "intersection". I see only three points where the graph actually crosses the x-axis. At x= 0 the graph goes down to the x-axis, touches it, then goes back up. If you count that as an intersection then there are 4 intersections. There are 5 (at least) zeros because x= 0 is a multiple (even multiplicity) zero.
Again, almost- and probably what was intended! But since we don't know what the actual function is, it is possible that the multiple root at x=0 is NOT just a double root, a sextuple root, quadruple root, etc. We do know, since the graph goes down to y= 0 then back up, it is a root of even multiplicity. That is why TKHunny said, earlier, that "Five is the MINIMUM number. Could be 7 or 9 or anything else odd greater than that."Describe the end behavior
f(x) —> - ∞ if x —> - ∞
f(x) —> + ∞ if x —> +∞
Determine whether it represents an odd-degree or even-degree function
Since the end behavior is in opposite directions, the graph represents an odd-degree polynomial function.
State the number of real zeros
The graph intersects the x-axis at 4 points, and there are 5 real zeros since x= 0 is a multiple.
Like this?
So how would I word the second step?Again, almost- and probably what was intended! But since we don't know what the actual function is, it is possible that the multiple root at x=0 is NOT just a double root, a sextuple root, quadruple root, etc. We do know, since the graph goes down to y= 0 then back up, it is a root of even multiplicity.
The point that Halls was making is that the question is badly worded. There is no way to tell how many real zeroes there are. There are four distinct real zeroes. And there are at least five real zeroes, one being duplicated, but we cannot tell how many times it is duplicated (other than it is an even number of times).So how would I word the second step?
So how would I properly answer the question?The point that Halls was making is that the question is badly worded. There is no way to tell how many real zeroes there are. There are four distinct real zeroes. And there are at least five real zeroes, one being duplicated, but we cannot tell how many times it is duplicated (other than it is an even number of times).
Who can be sure? I would probably answer "there are four distinct real zeroes, and, if we assume that this function is of degree five, five real zeroes, but there is insufficient information to determine anything more except that the polynomial is of odd degree > 3 and has no complex roots." But that might be a bad answer if your teacher is stupid and just looks at the answer key.So how would I properly answer the question?
Actually that was the point that TKHunny made before me.The point that Halls was making is that the question is badly worded. There is no way to tell how many real zeroes there are. There are four distinct real zeroes. And there are at least five real zeroes, one being duplicated, but we cannot tell how many times it is duplicated (other than it is an even number of times).
Yes he did, My point, however, is that the technical vocabulary truly is a bit confusing. Socratic questioning is not, in my opinion, useful for clarifying subtle distinctions among definitions.Actually that was the point that TKHunny made before me.