Re: _Graph_of_ a function is a relation.
- From: Gerry Myerson <gerry@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx>
- Date: Wed, 05 Apr 2006 00:10:13 GMT
In article <KdBYf.1523$pZ3.238439@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx>,
CB4Ever <CB4ever@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx> wrote:
Can someone tell me why the destiction between a function and it's graph
is made in the statement?: "The _graph_of_ a function is a relation."
The graph of a function IS the function (one representation of it), is
it not?
Would you say a picture of your mother is your mother?
A picture of your mother is a representation of your mother.
For some purposes, a picture of your mother is just as good
as your mother - for example, I could probably tell whether
I know your mother just by looking at her picture, without
actually seeing her. For some purposes, a picture of your
mother might even be better than your actual mother - for
sticking in a scrapbook and carrying around with you, for
instance. But, better or worse, a picture of your mother
isn't your mother. And the graph of a function isn't the
function.
--
Gerry Myerson (gerry@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx) (i -> u for email)
.
- Follow-Ups:
- Re: _Graph_of_ a function is a relation.
- From: computer
- Re: _Graph_of_ a function is a relation.
- Prev by Date: Re: self convolution
- Next by Date: Re: Question in rings
- Previous by thread: Re: _Graph_of_ a function is a relation.
- Next by thread: Re: _Graph_of_ a function is a relation.
- Index(es):
Relevant Pages
|
