Solving an equation has restricted values for being undefined but is not applicable to all forms











up vote
1
down vote

favorite












For example, in the case of this algebraic expression



$${7x^2+14xover2x+4}$$



It is provided that $x ne -2$, since division by 0 is not defined. It is understandable that replacing $-2$ will put forth an undefined solution. However on further simplification i.e.



$${7x^2+14xover2x+4} = {7x(x+2)over2(x+2)} = {7xover2}$$



we can also include $-2$ as a solvable value for $x$. My confusion here is, if $x$ cannot be $-2$, how is it possible that it can be used in a reduced form, shouldn't it be not usable in all forms of the algebraic expression?










share|cite|improve this question









New contributor




Sriram Jayaraman is a new contributor to this site. Take care in asking for clarification, commenting, and answering.
Check out our Code of Conduct.




















  • it has a removable discontinuity at $x=-2$
    – Rakibul Islam Prince
    4 hours ago










  • thanks @RakibulIslamPrince
    – Sriram Jayaraman
    4 hours ago















up vote
1
down vote

favorite












For example, in the case of this algebraic expression



$${7x^2+14xover2x+4}$$



It is provided that $x ne -2$, since division by 0 is not defined. It is understandable that replacing $-2$ will put forth an undefined solution. However on further simplification i.e.



$${7x^2+14xover2x+4} = {7x(x+2)over2(x+2)} = {7xover2}$$



we can also include $-2$ as a solvable value for $x$. My confusion here is, if $x$ cannot be $-2$, how is it possible that it can be used in a reduced form, shouldn't it be not usable in all forms of the algebraic expression?










share|cite|improve this question









New contributor




Sriram Jayaraman is a new contributor to this site. Take care in asking for clarification, commenting, and answering.
Check out our Code of Conduct.




















  • it has a removable discontinuity at $x=-2$
    – Rakibul Islam Prince
    4 hours ago










  • thanks @RakibulIslamPrince
    – Sriram Jayaraman
    4 hours ago













up vote
1
down vote

favorite









up vote
1
down vote

favorite











For example, in the case of this algebraic expression



$${7x^2+14xover2x+4}$$



It is provided that $x ne -2$, since division by 0 is not defined. It is understandable that replacing $-2$ will put forth an undefined solution. However on further simplification i.e.



$${7x^2+14xover2x+4} = {7x(x+2)over2(x+2)} = {7xover2}$$



we can also include $-2$ as a solvable value for $x$. My confusion here is, if $x$ cannot be $-2$, how is it possible that it can be used in a reduced form, shouldn't it be not usable in all forms of the algebraic expression?










share|cite|improve this question









New contributor




Sriram Jayaraman is a new contributor to this site. Take care in asking for clarification, commenting, and answering.
Check out our Code of Conduct.











For example, in the case of this algebraic expression



$${7x^2+14xover2x+4}$$



It is provided that $x ne -2$, since division by 0 is not defined. It is understandable that replacing $-2$ will put forth an undefined solution. However on further simplification i.e.



$${7x^2+14xover2x+4} = {7x(x+2)over2(x+2)} = {7xover2}$$



we can also include $-2$ as a solvable value for $x$. My confusion here is, if $x$ cannot be $-2$, how is it possible that it can be used in a reduced form, shouldn't it be not usable in all forms of the algebraic expression?







algebra-precalculus






share|cite|improve this question









New contributor




Sriram Jayaraman is a new contributor to this site. Take care in asking for clarification, commenting, and answering.
Check out our Code of Conduct.











share|cite|improve this question









New contributor




Sriram Jayaraman is a new contributor to this site. Take care in asking for clarification, commenting, and answering.
Check out our Code of Conduct.









share|cite|improve this question




share|cite|improve this question








edited 4 hours ago





















New contributor




Sriram Jayaraman is a new contributor to this site. Take care in asking for clarification, commenting, and answering.
Check out our Code of Conduct.









asked 4 hours ago









Sriram Jayaraman

84




84




New contributor




Sriram Jayaraman is a new contributor to this site. Take care in asking for clarification, commenting, and answering.
Check out our Code of Conduct.





New contributor





Sriram Jayaraman is a new contributor to this site. Take care in asking for clarification, commenting, and answering.
Check out our Code of Conduct.






Sriram Jayaraman is a new contributor to this site. Take care in asking for clarification, commenting, and answering.
Check out our Code of Conduct.












  • it has a removable discontinuity at $x=-2$
    – Rakibul Islam Prince
    4 hours ago










  • thanks @RakibulIslamPrince
    – Sriram Jayaraman
    4 hours ago


















  • it has a removable discontinuity at $x=-2$
    – Rakibul Islam Prince
    4 hours ago










  • thanks @RakibulIslamPrince
    – Sriram Jayaraman
    4 hours ago
















it has a removable discontinuity at $x=-2$
– Rakibul Islam Prince
4 hours ago




it has a removable discontinuity at $x=-2$
– Rakibul Islam Prince
4 hours ago












thanks @RakibulIslamPrince
– Sriram Jayaraman
4 hours ago




thanks @RakibulIslamPrince
– Sriram Jayaraman
4 hours ago










3 Answers
3






active

oldest

votes

















up vote
1
down vote



accepted










No, this is known as a removable discontinuity. By simplifying the original function, you reached a new function with that gap removed. Note that the original function and the simplified function are NOT the same because their domains aren't the same. As another example:
$$y = frac{x(x+2)}{x+2}; quad y = x$$



If you simplify the first function, you reach the second function. However, they aren't the same since the second function is defined for all $x in mathbb{R}$ whereas the first is defined for all $x neq -2$. If you graph them, they're the exact same, except the first has a gap at $x = -2$, while the second does not. (By simplifying, you removed that gap, or discontinuity at $x = -2$.) The same applies to your example.






share|cite|improve this answer





















  • I'm a complete math noob here. I kind of understand your statement, thanks for that, however aren't both expressions regarded to be one and the same. Plotting a graph over these functions cast a light about your statement, however I am still unclear of how the removal is even possible considering that they both appear the same to me.
    – Sriram Jayaraman
    4 hours ago










  • If they don't have the same domain, they aren't really the "same"! That's the point. Your second function is equivalent to your first in all ways except for the fact that the second function also has $x = -2$ in its domain, and that's what makes it different. My example highlights the same point.
    – KM101
    4 hours ago












  • Oh, so mathematically speaking two expressions aren't the same if their 'domains' aren't the same. I get it now. Kudos.
    – Sriram Jayaraman
    4 hours ago










  • Yes, exactly! (They are the same in every other way except for the difference in their domains.)
    – KM101
    4 hours ago




















up vote
0
down vote













The two expressions are equivalent for $xneq -2$ that is



$${7x^2+14xover2x+4} = {7xover2}$$



but for $x=-2$ the LHS is not defined.



In that case we can assign a value to the LHS also for $x=-2$, notably if we define



$${7x^2+14xover2x+4} = -7, quad x=-2$$



the two expression become completely equivalent (in that case we define it a removable discontinuity).






share|cite|improve this answer





















  • But doesn't this contradict @km101's statement of both expressions not being equivalent?
    – Sriram Jayaraman
    4 hours ago










  • @SriramJayaraman Without any specification (first line) they are equivalent for all $xneq -2$ but if we define ${7x^2+14xover2x+4} = -7$ for $x=-2$ they become completely equivalent.
    – gimusi
    4 hours ago










  • I get that now I guess, when we convert the expression into an equation with the desired value, both of them become equivalent. Thanks.
    – Sriram Jayaraman
    4 hours ago










  • @SriramJayaraman Yes exactly, since for any $xinmathbb{R}$ they return the same value.
    – gimusi
    4 hours ago


















up vote
0
down vote













I would draw a very rough sketch...
Say,you have some functions like



$f_1(x)=x^2$



$f_2(x)=dfrac{3x}{13}$



$f_3(x)=sqrt{x-1}$



now multiply $(x+2)$ with both the numerator and the denominator of those function .
Now they appear to be -



$f_1(x)=dfrac{x^2(x+2)}{(x+2)}$



$f_2(x)=dfrac{3x.(x+2)}{13(x+2)}$



$f_3(x)=dfrac{sqrt{x-1}.(x+2)}{13(x+2)}$



Now what do you say,each of the function is not valid at $x=-2$ !!!!
does it make any sense?Clearly this $x=-2$ point has nothing to do with those functions. This is purely irrelevant .so we must have to remove them.like this,in every function at first we should look for a removable discontinuity.if it exists then we must have to remove it to get the actual domain of the function.






share|cite|improve this answer





















    Your Answer





    StackExchange.ifUsing("editor", function () {
    return StackExchange.using("mathjaxEditing", function () {
    StackExchange.MarkdownEditor.creationCallbacks.add(function (editor, postfix) {
    StackExchange.mathjaxEditing.prepareWmdForMathJax(editor, postfix, [["$", "$"], ["\\(","\\)"]]);
    });
    });
    }, "mathjax-editing");

    StackExchange.ready(function() {
    var channelOptions = {
    tags: "".split(" "),
    id: "69"
    };
    initTagRenderer("".split(" "), "".split(" "), channelOptions);

    StackExchange.using("externalEditor", function() {
    // Have to fire editor after snippets, if snippets enabled
    if (StackExchange.settings.snippets.snippetsEnabled) {
    StackExchange.using("snippets", function() {
    createEditor();
    });
    }
    else {
    createEditor();
    }
    });

    function createEditor() {
    StackExchange.prepareEditor({
    heartbeatType: 'answer',
    convertImagesToLinks: true,
    noModals: true,
    showLowRepImageUploadWarning: true,
    reputationToPostImages: 10,
    bindNavPrevention: true,
    postfix: "",
    imageUploader: {
    brandingHtml: "Powered by u003ca class="icon-imgur-white" href="https://imgur.com/"u003eu003c/au003e",
    contentPolicyHtml: "User contributions licensed under u003ca href="https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-sa/3.0/"u003ecc by-sa 3.0 with attribution requiredu003c/au003e u003ca href="https://stackoverflow.com/legal/content-policy"u003e(content policy)u003c/au003e",
    allowUrls: true
    },
    noCode: true, onDemand: true,
    discardSelector: ".discard-answer"
    ,immediatelyShowMarkdownHelp:true
    });


    }
    });






    Sriram Jayaraman is a new contributor. Be nice, and check out our Code of Conduct.










     

    draft saved


    draft discarded


















    StackExchange.ready(
    function () {
    StackExchange.openid.initPostLogin('.new-post-login', 'https%3a%2f%2fmath.stackexchange.com%2fquestions%2f2995442%2fsolving-an-equation-has-restricted-values-for-being-undefined-but-is-not-applica%23new-answer', 'question_page');
    }
    );

    Post as a guest
































    3 Answers
    3






    active

    oldest

    votes








    3 Answers
    3






    active

    oldest

    votes









    active

    oldest

    votes






    active

    oldest

    votes








    up vote
    1
    down vote



    accepted










    No, this is known as a removable discontinuity. By simplifying the original function, you reached a new function with that gap removed. Note that the original function and the simplified function are NOT the same because their domains aren't the same. As another example:
    $$y = frac{x(x+2)}{x+2}; quad y = x$$



    If you simplify the first function, you reach the second function. However, they aren't the same since the second function is defined for all $x in mathbb{R}$ whereas the first is defined for all $x neq -2$. If you graph them, they're the exact same, except the first has a gap at $x = -2$, while the second does not. (By simplifying, you removed that gap, or discontinuity at $x = -2$.) The same applies to your example.






    share|cite|improve this answer





















    • I'm a complete math noob here. I kind of understand your statement, thanks for that, however aren't both expressions regarded to be one and the same. Plotting a graph over these functions cast a light about your statement, however I am still unclear of how the removal is even possible considering that they both appear the same to me.
      – Sriram Jayaraman
      4 hours ago










    • If they don't have the same domain, they aren't really the "same"! That's the point. Your second function is equivalent to your first in all ways except for the fact that the second function also has $x = -2$ in its domain, and that's what makes it different. My example highlights the same point.
      – KM101
      4 hours ago












    • Oh, so mathematically speaking two expressions aren't the same if their 'domains' aren't the same. I get it now. Kudos.
      – Sriram Jayaraman
      4 hours ago










    • Yes, exactly! (They are the same in every other way except for the difference in their domains.)
      – KM101
      4 hours ago

















    up vote
    1
    down vote



    accepted










    No, this is known as a removable discontinuity. By simplifying the original function, you reached a new function with that gap removed. Note that the original function and the simplified function are NOT the same because their domains aren't the same. As another example:
    $$y = frac{x(x+2)}{x+2}; quad y = x$$



    If you simplify the first function, you reach the second function. However, they aren't the same since the second function is defined for all $x in mathbb{R}$ whereas the first is defined for all $x neq -2$. If you graph them, they're the exact same, except the first has a gap at $x = -2$, while the second does not. (By simplifying, you removed that gap, or discontinuity at $x = -2$.) The same applies to your example.






    share|cite|improve this answer





















    • I'm a complete math noob here. I kind of understand your statement, thanks for that, however aren't both expressions regarded to be one and the same. Plotting a graph over these functions cast a light about your statement, however I am still unclear of how the removal is even possible considering that they both appear the same to me.
      – Sriram Jayaraman
      4 hours ago










    • If they don't have the same domain, they aren't really the "same"! That's the point. Your second function is equivalent to your first in all ways except for the fact that the second function also has $x = -2$ in its domain, and that's what makes it different. My example highlights the same point.
      – KM101
      4 hours ago












    • Oh, so mathematically speaking two expressions aren't the same if their 'domains' aren't the same. I get it now. Kudos.
      – Sriram Jayaraman
      4 hours ago










    • Yes, exactly! (They are the same in every other way except for the difference in their domains.)
      – KM101
      4 hours ago















    up vote
    1
    down vote



    accepted







    up vote
    1
    down vote



    accepted






    No, this is known as a removable discontinuity. By simplifying the original function, you reached a new function with that gap removed. Note that the original function and the simplified function are NOT the same because their domains aren't the same. As another example:
    $$y = frac{x(x+2)}{x+2}; quad y = x$$



    If you simplify the first function, you reach the second function. However, they aren't the same since the second function is defined for all $x in mathbb{R}$ whereas the first is defined for all $x neq -2$. If you graph them, they're the exact same, except the first has a gap at $x = -2$, while the second does not. (By simplifying, you removed that gap, or discontinuity at $x = -2$.) The same applies to your example.






    share|cite|improve this answer












    No, this is known as a removable discontinuity. By simplifying the original function, you reached a new function with that gap removed. Note that the original function and the simplified function are NOT the same because their domains aren't the same. As another example:
    $$y = frac{x(x+2)}{x+2}; quad y = x$$



    If you simplify the first function, you reach the second function. However, they aren't the same since the second function is defined for all $x in mathbb{R}$ whereas the first is defined for all $x neq -2$. If you graph them, they're the exact same, except the first has a gap at $x = -2$, while the second does not. (By simplifying, you removed that gap, or discontinuity at $x = -2$.) The same applies to your example.







    share|cite|improve this answer












    share|cite|improve this answer



    share|cite|improve this answer










    answered 4 hours ago









    KM101

    1,584112




    1,584112












    • I'm a complete math noob here. I kind of understand your statement, thanks for that, however aren't both expressions regarded to be one and the same. Plotting a graph over these functions cast a light about your statement, however I am still unclear of how the removal is even possible considering that they both appear the same to me.
      – Sriram Jayaraman
      4 hours ago










    • If they don't have the same domain, they aren't really the "same"! That's the point. Your second function is equivalent to your first in all ways except for the fact that the second function also has $x = -2$ in its domain, and that's what makes it different. My example highlights the same point.
      – KM101
      4 hours ago












    • Oh, so mathematically speaking two expressions aren't the same if their 'domains' aren't the same. I get it now. Kudos.
      – Sriram Jayaraman
      4 hours ago










    • Yes, exactly! (They are the same in every other way except for the difference in their domains.)
      – KM101
      4 hours ago




















    • I'm a complete math noob here. I kind of understand your statement, thanks for that, however aren't both expressions regarded to be one and the same. Plotting a graph over these functions cast a light about your statement, however I am still unclear of how the removal is even possible considering that they both appear the same to me.
      – Sriram Jayaraman
      4 hours ago










    • If they don't have the same domain, they aren't really the "same"! That's the point. Your second function is equivalent to your first in all ways except for the fact that the second function also has $x = -2$ in its domain, and that's what makes it different. My example highlights the same point.
      – KM101
      4 hours ago












    • Oh, so mathematically speaking two expressions aren't the same if their 'domains' aren't the same. I get it now. Kudos.
      – Sriram Jayaraman
      4 hours ago










    • Yes, exactly! (They are the same in every other way except for the difference in their domains.)
      – KM101
      4 hours ago


















    I'm a complete math noob here. I kind of understand your statement, thanks for that, however aren't both expressions regarded to be one and the same. Plotting a graph over these functions cast a light about your statement, however I am still unclear of how the removal is even possible considering that they both appear the same to me.
    – Sriram Jayaraman
    4 hours ago




    I'm a complete math noob here. I kind of understand your statement, thanks for that, however aren't both expressions regarded to be one and the same. Plotting a graph over these functions cast a light about your statement, however I am still unclear of how the removal is even possible considering that they both appear the same to me.
    – Sriram Jayaraman
    4 hours ago












    If they don't have the same domain, they aren't really the "same"! That's the point. Your second function is equivalent to your first in all ways except for the fact that the second function also has $x = -2$ in its domain, and that's what makes it different. My example highlights the same point.
    – KM101
    4 hours ago






    If they don't have the same domain, they aren't really the "same"! That's the point. Your second function is equivalent to your first in all ways except for the fact that the second function also has $x = -2$ in its domain, and that's what makes it different. My example highlights the same point.
    – KM101
    4 hours ago














    Oh, so mathematically speaking two expressions aren't the same if their 'domains' aren't the same. I get it now. Kudos.
    – Sriram Jayaraman
    4 hours ago




    Oh, so mathematically speaking two expressions aren't the same if their 'domains' aren't the same. I get it now. Kudos.
    – Sriram Jayaraman
    4 hours ago












    Yes, exactly! (They are the same in every other way except for the difference in their domains.)
    – KM101
    4 hours ago






    Yes, exactly! (They are the same in every other way except for the difference in their domains.)
    – KM101
    4 hours ago












    up vote
    0
    down vote













    The two expressions are equivalent for $xneq -2$ that is



    $${7x^2+14xover2x+4} = {7xover2}$$



    but for $x=-2$ the LHS is not defined.



    In that case we can assign a value to the LHS also for $x=-2$, notably if we define



    $${7x^2+14xover2x+4} = -7, quad x=-2$$



    the two expression become completely equivalent (in that case we define it a removable discontinuity).






    share|cite|improve this answer





















    • But doesn't this contradict @km101's statement of both expressions not being equivalent?
      – Sriram Jayaraman
      4 hours ago










    • @SriramJayaraman Without any specification (first line) they are equivalent for all $xneq -2$ but if we define ${7x^2+14xover2x+4} = -7$ for $x=-2$ they become completely equivalent.
      – gimusi
      4 hours ago










    • I get that now I guess, when we convert the expression into an equation with the desired value, both of them become equivalent. Thanks.
      – Sriram Jayaraman
      4 hours ago










    • @SriramJayaraman Yes exactly, since for any $xinmathbb{R}$ they return the same value.
      – gimusi
      4 hours ago















    up vote
    0
    down vote













    The two expressions are equivalent for $xneq -2$ that is



    $${7x^2+14xover2x+4} = {7xover2}$$



    but for $x=-2$ the LHS is not defined.



    In that case we can assign a value to the LHS also for $x=-2$, notably if we define



    $${7x^2+14xover2x+4} = -7, quad x=-2$$



    the two expression become completely equivalent (in that case we define it a removable discontinuity).






    share|cite|improve this answer





















    • But doesn't this contradict @km101's statement of both expressions not being equivalent?
      – Sriram Jayaraman
      4 hours ago










    • @SriramJayaraman Without any specification (first line) they are equivalent for all $xneq -2$ but if we define ${7x^2+14xover2x+4} = -7$ for $x=-2$ they become completely equivalent.
      – gimusi
      4 hours ago










    • I get that now I guess, when we convert the expression into an equation with the desired value, both of them become equivalent. Thanks.
      – Sriram Jayaraman
      4 hours ago










    • @SriramJayaraman Yes exactly, since for any $xinmathbb{R}$ they return the same value.
      – gimusi
      4 hours ago













    up vote
    0
    down vote










    up vote
    0
    down vote









    The two expressions are equivalent for $xneq -2$ that is



    $${7x^2+14xover2x+4} = {7xover2}$$



    but for $x=-2$ the LHS is not defined.



    In that case we can assign a value to the LHS also for $x=-2$, notably if we define



    $${7x^2+14xover2x+4} = -7, quad x=-2$$



    the two expression become completely equivalent (in that case we define it a removable discontinuity).






    share|cite|improve this answer












    The two expressions are equivalent for $xneq -2$ that is



    $${7x^2+14xover2x+4} = {7xover2}$$



    but for $x=-2$ the LHS is not defined.



    In that case we can assign a value to the LHS also for $x=-2$, notably if we define



    $${7x^2+14xover2x+4} = -7, quad x=-2$$



    the two expression become completely equivalent (in that case we define it a removable discontinuity).







    share|cite|improve this answer












    share|cite|improve this answer



    share|cite|improve this answer










    answered 4 hours ago









    gimusi

    83.8k74292




    83.8k74292












    • But doesn't this contradict @km101's statement of both expressions not being equivalent?
      – Sriram Jayaraman
      4 hours ago










    • @SriramJayaraman Without any specification (first line) they are equivalent for all $xneq -2$ but if we define ${7x^2+14xover2x+4} = -7$ for $x=-2$ they become completely equivalent.
      – gimusi
      4 hours ago










    • I get that now I guess, when we convert the expression into an equation with the desired value, both of them become equivalent. Thanks.
      – Sriram Jayaraman
      4 hours ago










    • @SriramJayaraman Yes exactly, since for any $xinmathbb{R}$ they return the same value.
      – gimusi
      4 hours ago


















    • But doesn't this contradict @km101's statement of both expressions not being equivalent?
      – Sriram Jayaraman
      4 hours ago










    • @SriramJayaraman Without any specification (first line) they are equivalent for all $xneq -2$ but if we define ${7x^2+14xover2x+4} = -7$ for $x=-2$ they become completely equivalent.
      – gimusi
      4 hours ago










    • I get that now I guess, when we convert the expression into an equation with the desired value, both of them become equivalent. Thanks.
      – Sriram Jayaraman
      4 hours ago










    • @SriramJayaraman Yes exactly, since for any $xinmathbb{R}$ they return the same value.
      – gimusi
      4 hours ago
















    But doesn't this contradict @km101's statement of both expressions not being equivalent?
    – Sriram Jayaraman
    4 hours ago




    But doesn't this contradict @km101's statement of both expressions not being equivalent?
    – Sriram Jayaraman
    4 hours ago












    @SriramJayaraman Without any specification (first line) they are equivalent for all $xneq -2$ but if we define ${7x^2+14xover2x+4} = -7$ for $x=-2$ they become completely equivalent.
    – gimusi
    4 hours ago




    @SriramJayaraman Without any specification (first line) they are equivalent for all $xneq -2$ but if we define ${7x^2+14xover2x+4} = -7$ for $x=-2$ they become completely equivalent.
    – gimusi
    4 hours ago












    I get that now I guess, when we convert the expression into an equation with the desired value, both of them become equivalent. Thanks.
    – Sriram Jayaraman
    4 hours ago




    I get that now I guess, when we convert the expression into an equation with the desired value, both of them become equivalent. Thanks.
    – Sriram Jayaraman
    4 hours ago












    @SriramJayaraman Yes exactly, since for any $xinmathbb{R}$ they return the same value.
    – gimusi
    4 hours ago




    @SriramJayaraman Yes exactly, since for any $xinmathbb{R}$ they return the same value.
    – gimusi
    4 hours ago










    up vote
    0
    down vote













    I would draw a very rough sketch...
    Say,you have some functions like



    $f_1(x)=x^2$



    $f_2(x)=dfrac{3x}{13}$



    $f_3(x)=sqrt{x-1}$



    now multiply $(x+2)$ with both the numerator and the denominator of those function .
    Now they appear to be -



    $f_1(x)=dfrac{x^2(x+2)}{(x+2)}$



    $f_2(x)=dfrac{3x.(x+2)}{13(x+2)}$



    $f_3(x)=dfrac{sqrt{x-1}.(x+2)}{13(x+2)}$



    Now what do you say,each of the function is not valid at $x=-2$ !!!!
    does it make any sense?Clearly this $x=-2$ point has nothing to do with those functions. This is purely irrelevant .so we must have to remove them.like this,in every function at first we should look for a removable discontinuity.if it exists then we must have to remove it to get the actual domain of the function.






    share|cite|improve this answer

























      up vote
      0
      down vote













      I would draw a very rough sketch...
      Say,you have some functions like



      $f_1(x)=x^2$



      $f_2(x)=dfrac{3x}{13}$



      $f_3(x)=sqrt{x-1}$



      now multiply $(x+2)$ with both the numerator and the denominator of those function .
      Now they appear to be -



      $f_1(x)=dfrac{x^2(x+2)}{(x+2)}$



      $f_2(x)=dfrac{3x.(x+2)}{13(x+2)}$



      $f_3(x)=dfrac{sqrt{x-1}.(x+2)}{13(x+2)}$



      Now what do you say,each of the function is not valid at $x=-2$ !!!!
      does it make any sense?Clearly this $x=-2$ point has nothing to do with those functions. This is purely irrelevant .so we must have to remove them.like this,in every function at first we should look for a removable discontinuity.if it exists then we must have to remove it to get the actual domain of the function.






      share|cite|improve this answer























        up vote
        0
        down vote










        up vote
        0
        down vote









        I would draw a very rough sketch...
        Say,you have some functions like



        $f_1(x)=x^2$



        $f_2(x)=dfrac{3x}{13}$



        $f_3(x)=sqrt{x-1}$



        now multiply $(x+2)$ with both the numerator and the denominator of those function .
        Now they appear to be -



        $f_1(x)=dfrac{x^2(x+2)}{(x+2)}$



        $f_2(x)=dfrac{3x.(x+2)}{13(x+2)}$



        $f_3(x)=dfrac{sqrt{x-1}.(x+2)}{13(x+2)}$



        Now what do you say,each of the function is not valid at $x=-2$ !!!!
        does it make any sense?Clearly this $x=-2$ point has nothing to do with those functions. This is purely irrelevant .so we must have to remove them.like this,in every function at first we should look for a removable discontinuity.if it exists then we must have to remove it to get the actual domain of the function.






        share|cite|improve this answer












        I would draw a very rough sketch...
        Say,you have some functions like



        $f_1(x)=x^2$



        $f_2(x)=dfrac{3x}{13}$



        $f_3(x)=sqrt{x-1}$



        now multiply $(x+2)$ with both the numerator and the denominator of those function .
        Now they appear to be -



        $f_1(x)=dfrac{x^2(x+2)}{(x+2)}$



        $f_2(x)=dfrac{3x.(x+2)}{13(x+2)}$



        $f_3(x)=dfrac{sqrt{x-1}.(x+2)}{13(x+2)}$



        Now what do you say,each of the function is not valid at $x=-2$ !!!!
        does it make any sense?Clearly this $x=-2$ point has nothing to do with those functions. This is purely irrelevant .so we must have to remove them.like this,in every function at first we should look for a removable discontinuity.if it exists then we must have to remove it to get the actual domain of the function.







        share|cite|improve this answer












        share|cite|improve this answer



        share|cite|improve this answer










        answered 4 hours ago









        Rakibul Islam Prince

        77829




        77829






















            Sriram Jayaraman is a new contributor. Be nice, and check out our Code of Conduct.










             

            draft saved


            draft discarded


















            Sriram Jayaraman is a new contributor. Be nice, and check out our Code of Conduct.













            Sriram Jayaraman is a new contributor. Be nice, and check out our Code of Conduct.












            Sriram Jayaraman is a new contributor. Be nice, and check out our Code of Conduct.















             


            draft saved


            draft discarded














            StackExchange.ready(
            function () {
            StackExchange.openid.initPostLogin('.new-post-login', 'https%3a%2f%2fmath.stackexchange.com%2fquestions%2f2995442%2fsolving-an-equation-has-restricted-values-for-being-undefined-but-is-not-applica%23new-answer', 'question_page');
            }
            );

            Post as a guest




















































































            Popular posts from this blog

            How to send String Array data to Server using php in android

            Title Spacing in Bjornstrup Chapter, Removing Chapter Number From Contents

            Is anime1.com a legal site for watching anime?