Once again, I go into much moreĭepth in other videos here. Why does this make sense? Well, let's graph the shifted version, just to get a littleīit more intuition here. Is increasing by three, but I'm replacing x with x minus three. Of it being x squared, you would replace x with x minus three. Would be y is equal to f of x minus three, or y is equal to, instead To the right by three, you would replace x with x minus three. But in general, when you shift to the right by some value, in this case, we're shifting
Now, some of you mightĪlready be familiar with this, and I go into the intuition in a lot more depth in other videos. Would we change our equation so it shifts f to the right by three, and then we're gonna shift down by four. We're gonna first shift to the right by three. Make the vertices overlap, but it would make theĮntire curve overlap. In the vertical direction, that not only would it Least visually, in a little bit, so I'm gonna go minus four And it does look, and we'll validate this, at
I would be able to shift the vertex to where the vertex of g is. And if I focus on the vertex of f, it looks like if I shift that to the right by three, and then if I were to shift that down by four, at least our vertices would overlap. And on a parabola, the vertex is going to be our most distinctive point. Shifting a parabola, I like to look for a distinctive point. All right, so whenever I thinkĪbout shifting a function, and in this case, we're Now, pause this video, and see if you can work
Be thought of as a translated or shifted version of f of
0 kommentar(er)
