Critical Pts (1 Viewer)
- Thread starter Lukybear
- Start date
GUSSSSSSSSSSSSS
Active Member
critical points are any time that the graph changes (crap definition but yeaaaa lol)
so this includes stationary points, and also as u said: discontinuities, cusps, etc
so this includes stationary points, and also as u said: discontinuities, cusps, etc
A critical point of a function f is any point x in the domain of f for which the first derivative f' at the point x is 0 or not defined? I wouldn't call an inflection point a critical point (unless it's a horizontal inflection point), so don't take my word for it, take your text-book's/teacher's word for it.
Yes, after a comment like a definition is useless, only to follow by a (not so helpful) definition, you're missing an invitation to leave the mathematics forum for the mathematical crimes of (1) disparaging definitions, and (2) abuse of logic
I'm happy to oblige.
Joking .. mostly
I'm happy to oblige.
Joking .. mostly
This. Take first derivative. then solve x for dy/dx = 0
Previous post edited for your sake.
annabackwards
<3 Prophet 9
y' = 0 or y' is undefined 
POIs are only critical points if they're horizontal POIs
POIs are only critical points if they're horizontal POIs
Well no, because the second derivative would not be undefined or zero, as per the definition Trebla provided.
It simply would not exist.
Um i think the definition of a function should be raised.
From Wolfram:
A function is a relation that uniquely associates members of one set with members of another set.
A function y=f(x) has critical points at all points x0 where f^'(x0)=0 or f(x) is not differentiable.
So f: R -> R (real numbers in domain mapping to real numbers in codomain), where f(x)=1/x is not a function as f(0) is not defined. Thus f does not uniquely associate 0 with a real number in the codomain and f is not a function, thus we cannot use the definition of critical points for a function on f. Thus we cannot say 0 is a critical point.
However, if f: R/{0} -> R (real numbers excluding 0 in domain mapping to real numbers in codomain) where f(x)=1/x is a function, as every real number in the domain can be mapped to a real number in the codomain. Thus the definition of critical points for a function can be applied. However, 0 is not in the domain of f, so it cannot possibly be a critical point.
Also, for f: R--> R, f(x)=sqrt(x) is not a function, as it does not map negative numbers to any numbers in the real codomain, however for g: (0, inf) --> R, g(x)=sqrt(x) and h:Real --> Complex where h(x)=sqrt(x) are functions.
EDIT: Yeh but for high school definitions are useless, and sometimes wrong...
From Wolfram:
A function is a relation that uniquely associates members of one set with members of another set.
A function y=f(x) has critical points at all points x0 where f^'(x0)=0 or f(x) is not differentiable.
So f: R -> R (real numbers in domain mapping to real numbers in codomain), where f(x)=1/x is not a function as f(0) is not defined. Thus f does not uniquely associate 0 with a real number in the codomain and f is not a function, thus we cannot use the definition of critical points for a function on f. Thus we cannot say 0 is a critical point.
However, if f: R/{0} -> R (real numbers excluding 0 in domain mapping to real numbers in codomain) where f(x)=1/x is a function, as every real number in the domain can be mapped to a real number in the codomain. Thus the definition of critical points for a function can be applied. However, 0 is not in the domain of f, so it cannot possibly be a critical point.
Also, for f: R--> R, f(x)=sqrt(x) is not a function, as it does not map negative numbers to any numbers in the real codomain, however for g: (0, inf) --> R, g(x)=sqrt(x) and h:Real --> Complex where h(x)=sqrt(x) are functions.
EDIT: Yeh but for high school definitions are useless, and sometimes wrong...
Last edited:
Implicit here is that x is in the domain of f.
Nice.
Your function h is not well-defined without choosing a branch of sqrt map. Otherwise, nice (assuming you apply the same observation about the domain/critical points as you did above).
They definitely aren't useless, and definitions can't be wrong - they're definitions. They should be consistent with what is likely to be seen in later work though.
I agree that definitions are important, except high school maths is currently not rigorous enough to deal with them in detail (for example defining functions without specifying domain and codomain). High school mathematics is just applications, where proving important theorems is rare. Proofs are where definitions need to be well known but unfortunately proofs are not a big part of the syllabus. (I dont mean proving results via LHS and RHS, I mean actual proofs of theorems from definitions and axioms).
Btw, I assumed that i took the positive branch of the square root map.
Btw, I assumed that i took the positive branch of the square root map.
Domain and range is covered at high school, and I think you'll find definitions are more prevalent than you let on. Textbooks aren't written in a Definition / Theorem / Proof style, sure, but I'm sure most of the detail is there.
Btw, there is no concept of "positive" when dealing with complex numbers. Perhaps you meant the upper half plane without the negative real line?
Btw, there is no concept of "positive" when dealing with complex numbers. Perhaps you meant the upper half plane without the negative real line?
Oops....sorry you're right about the complex numbers. probably should redefine the codomain as the portion of complex numbers z where Re(z)>=0.
Yes, the definitions are provided to students via textbooks, but knowing them rigorously is not needed for most part of their examinations and hence the rigor of definitions are often ignored.
Yes, the definitions are provided to students via textbooks, but knowing them rigorously is not needed for most part of their examinations and hence the rigor of definitions are often ignored.