Question 334628
<font face="Garamond" size="+2">


I'm pretty sure you have a typo in your definition of *[tex \Large g(x)].  Taking what you wrote literally, *[tex \Large g(x)] is a Boolean function that is always false.


Since *[tex \Large x^2] is always positive, *[tex \Large -x^2] must always be negative, and *[tex \Large -x^2\ =\ 3] is an unwaveringly false statement since 3 is a positive number.


Such a function does not have a value that exists in *[tex \Large \mathbb{R}], hence there is no point in *[tex \Large \mathbb{R}^2] to which *[tex \Large g(x)] maps.  Therefore there is no point of intersection between *[tex \Large f(x)] and *[tex \Large g(x)].



John
*[tex \LARGE e^{i\pi} + 1 = 0]
My calculator said it, I believe it, that settles it
<img src="http://c0rk.blogs.com/gr0undzer0/darwin-fish.jpg">
</font>