Okay, here's what's confusing (to me): g(2) = (2)²-(2) + 1 According to PEMDAS, aren't I supposed to do the parentheses first, followed by the exponents? If so, shouldn't my next step be (2)² = 4-(-2)?
I am not sure your are correct, if the domain of a function is defined as values that lead to a real number solution, you are correct, however if function is a rule that takes as input a real number and the result is a complex value, i am not sure that imaginary results are invalid and prevent the function from being defined at those points.
You are technically correct. The best kind of correct. Had he defined that the _range_ be in terms of real numbers, as well as the domain, the restrictions presented would have been correct. But, let's cut John some slack. His intended audience might not have gotten to complex numbers yet, or even imaginary ones. This stuff is hard enough already for some of us.
@ Alan Raymond He indicated as much by writing the real number symbol just below the word “Domain” that he’s working with the set of real numbers. Of course, there are five subsets of real numbers: natural numbers, whole numbers, integers, rational, and irrational. So, of course, and somewhat to your point, he should’ve been more specific and indicated or stated that he’s working only with the subset of real numbers called the “whole numbers” (0,1,2,3,4,5,6,7,…..) and avoided any confusion or questions. Any and all of those numbers work beneath the radical sign, so does the set of “natural numbers (1,2,3,4,5,6,7,…..), of course. After viewing the video further I stand corrected. Even within the set of whole numbers there are nonetheless restrictions regarding the domain. X cannot equal 5, x must be greater than or equal to negative 1, and x + 1 must be greater than or equal to 0!
Okay, here's what's confusing (to me):
g(2) = (2)²-(2) + 1
According to PEMDAS, aren't I supposed to do the parentheses first, followed by the exponents? If so, shouldn't my next step be (2)² = 4-(-2)?
Kids should want to learn more and your helping kids have that mentality and I applaud you for that
2 or 2.3?
Thanks!
Little bit to fast.
I am not sure your are correct, if the domain of a function is defined as values that lead to a real number solution, you are correct, however if function is a rule that takes as input a real number and the result is a complex value, i am not sure that imaginary results are invalid and prevent the function from being defined at those points.
You are technically correct. The best kind of correct. Had he defined that the _range_ be in terms of real numbers, as well as the domain, the restrictions presented would have been correct. But, let's cut John some slack. His intended audience might not have gotten to complex numbers yet, or even imaginary ones. This stuff is hard enough already for some of us.
@ Alan Raymond
He indicated as much by writing the real number symbol just below the word “Domain” that he’s working with the set of real numbers. Of course, there are five subsets of real numbers: natural numbers, whole numbers, integers, rational, and irrational. So, of course, and somewhat to your point, he should’ve been more specific and indicated or stated that he’s working only with the subset of real numbers called the “whole numbers” (0,1,2,3,4,5,6,7,…..) and avoided any confusion or questions. Any and all of those numbers work beneath the radical sign, so does the set of “natural numbers (1,2,3,4,5,6,7,…..), of course.
After viewing the video further I stand corrected. Even within the set of whole numbers there are nonetheless restrictions regarding the domain. X cannot equal 5, x must be greater than or equal to negative 1, and x + 1 must be greater than or equal to 0!
This is why I stay the HELL away from Algebra.
!
Can you seriously not figure it out I mean he's practically giving you the answer