Identify each of the following functions as polynomial, rational, algebraic, or transcendentalf(x)=(2x^3+3x)/(9-7x^2)

Yulia 2020-11-05 Answered

Identify each of the following functions as polynomial, rational, algebraic, or transcendental
f(x)=2x3+3x97x2

You can still ask an expert for help

Expert Community at Your Service

  • Live experts 24/7
  • Questions are typically answered in as fast as 30 minutes
  • Personalized clear answers
Learn more

Solve your problem for the price of one coffee

  • Available 24/7
  • Math expert for every subject
  • Pay only if we can solve it
Ask Question

Expert Answer

d2saint0
Answered 2020-11-06 Author has 89 answers
If a function can be defined by a rational fraction i.e. an algebraic fraction such that both the numerator and the denominator are polynomials then it is called ration function.
The given function has polynomial in numerator and denominator both, so this function is a rational function
Answer: Rational function
Not exactly what you’re looking for?
Ask My Question

Expert Community at Your Service

  • Live experts 24/7
  • Questions are typically answered in as fast as 30 minutes
  • Personalized clear answers
Learn more

Relevant Questions

asked 2021-02-25
True or False. The graph of a rational function may intersect a horizontal asymptote.
asked 2022-04-04
Where is the function u 2 14 u + 40 ( u 1 ) ( u 2 + 8 u + 15 ) discontinuous?
asked 2021-07-03
For the following exercises, find the domain of the rational functions.
f(x)=x1x+2
asked 2022-05-31
I recently came across the result that
n = 2 n 4 n 3 + n + 1 n 6 1 = 1 2
I am wondering how one could proof this, generally how one could evaluate a sum over rational functions.
If I plug the sum into Wolfram Alpha it gives
3 k 4 k 2 6 k ( k + 1 ) ( k 2 + k + 1 )
as the k-th partial sum. Taking the limit as n , this would in fact proof the upper equality.
Sadly, I could not wrap my head around how to get to Wolfram Alphas partial sum result. If anyone has an idea let me know. Any tips are appreciated.
asked 2022-05-15
We know that given a rational number of the from p / q if we expand it in the decimal base that is an expansion in power of 10 and we know that coefficient is repeating after finite step. In other words, we can say that we need only finitely many coefficients to describe the rest. Let F ( z ) be a rational function that is F ( z ) = p ( z ) q ( z ) . I take the Taylor series expansion of F ( z ) at the point away from the pole (maybe in a local coordinate around the point). Say
F ( z ) z = a t k ( z a ) k
My question is there any finite condition on the coefficient of t k ? That is we need only finitely many t k 's to determine the rest? If so what will be the proof?
asked 2022-05-19
Under what conditions a rational function has bounded derivative?
This question arise to me when considering the following theorem:
If f C 1 ( I , R ) where I is an interval then:
f is globally lipschitz
L 0. t I . | f ( t ) | L
So taking rational function f ( x ) = p ( x ) q ( x ) we have f ( x ) = p ( x ) q ( x ) p ( x ) q ( x ) q ( x ) 2 .
My view
I think I should assume that f : R R so that x R . q ( x ) 0 (however this doesn't seem to be necesary). And then perhaps a condition on the degree guarantees boundedness...
asked 2022-05-27
Question: Give an example of a rational function that has vertical asymptote x = 3 now give an example of one that has vertical asymptote x = 3 and horizontal asymptote y = 2. Now give an example of a rational function with vertical asymptotes x = 1 and x = 1, horizontal asymptote y = 0 and x-intercept 4.
My solution: ( a ) 1 ( x 3 ) . This is because when we find vertical asymptote(s) of a function, we find out the value where the denominator is 0 because then the equation will be of a vertical line for its slope will be undefined.
( b ) 2 x ( x 3 ) . Same reasoning for vertical asymptote, but for horizontal asymptote, when the degree of the denominator and the numerator is the same, we divide the coefficient of the leading term in the numerator with that in the denominator, in this case 2 1 = 2
( c ) ( x 4 ) ( x 1 ) ( x + 1 ) . Same reasoning for vertical asymptote. Horizontal asymptote will be y = 0 as the degree of the numerator is less than that of the denominator and x-intercept will be 4 as to get intercept, we have to make y, that is, f ( x ) = 0 and hence, make the numerator 0. So, in this case; to get x-intercept 4, we use ( x 4 ) in the numerator so that ( x 4 ) = 0 x = 4.
Are my solutions correct of have I missed anything, concept-wise or even with the calculations?