Question 1122137
<font face="Times New Roman" size="+2">


There is no *[tex \Large x]-intercept.  I must assume without any other information, that the given points are all of the elements of the set that comprise your function.  In other words:


*[tex \LARGE \ \ \ \ \ \ \ \ \ \ f(x)\ =\ \{(-5,-4),(-1,-4),(0,-4),(3,-4),(4,-4)\}]


The *[tex \Large x]-intercept of any function is the ordered pair(s) that is an element of the set that enumerates the function where the *[tex \Large y]-coordinate is equal to zero.


The *[tex \Large y]-intercept is the point where the *[tex \Large x]-coordinate is zero.


The value of the function at any point in its domain is -4. So the indicated sum is two instances of the function evaluated at two different values from the domain of the function, each of which evaluates to -4, added together.  I'll let you ponder the actual arithmetic involved.  Here is a point of view that may eliminate some of the confusion, at least as far as this part of the question is concerned:  Stop thinking about ordered pairs as *[tex \Large (x,\,y)], rather think of them as *[tex \Large \(x,\,f(x)\)]
								
								
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">
*[tex \Large \ \
*[tex \LARGE \ \ \ \ \ \ \ \ \ \  
								
{{n}\choose{r}}
</font>