|
Question 245882: Hi i really need help with this question: Alex states that the relation below is not a function. Lillian says that it is a function. Who is correct? Explain your reasoning.
Relation { (13,14), (12,5) , (16,7), (13, 14), (-2, 33), (13, 14 }
Explanation:
I'm not sure if it is a function or not, and i dont know how to explain it because of that.
Thanks -Drea
Found 3 solutions by solver91311, stanbon, jsmallt9: Answer by solver91311(24713) (Show Source): Answer by stanbon(75887) (Show Source):
You can put this solution on YOUR website! Hi i really need help with this question: Alex states that the relation below is not a function. Lillian says that it is a function. Who is correct? Explain your reasoning.
Relation { (13,14), (12,5) , (16,7), (13, 14), (-2, 33), (13, 14}
-------------
It is a function because each DIFFERENT x value has only one y value.
=========================================================
Cheers,
Stan H.
Answer by jsmallt9(3758) (Show Source):
You can put this solution on YOUR website! Here's a couple of ways to do this:- In a function no two ordered pairs have the same x value and different y values. We have three ordered pairs with the same x, 13. But they all have the same y, 14! So this is a function.
- Plot the points on a graph. (You will end up plotting (13,14) three times (on top of itself) but it still counts as just a single point.) Then look at the graph. There is no vertical line which passes through any two of the points. So this graph, and therefore the relation, passes the vertical line test and is a function.
|
|
|
| |