![cupcakes](/_next/image?url=https%3A%2F%2Favatars.slack-edge.com%2F2023-04-15%2F5116546887938_afb907f96fa13e434a49_192.png&w=96&q=75)
![desmos-threat emoji](/_next/image?url=https%3A%2F%2Femoji.slack-edge.com%2FT0266FRGM%2Fdesmos-threat%2Fdac9333555346d52.png&w=96&q=75)
Posts tagged with :desmos-threat:
![cupcakes](/_next/image?url=https%3A%2F%2Favatars.slack-edge.com%2F2023-04-15%2F5116546887938_afb907f96fa13e434a49_192.png&w=96&q=75)
![karmanyaahm](/_next/image?url=https%3A%2F%2Favatars.slack-edge.com%2F2024-03-26%2F6860623871491_550427ce390820127b95_192.jpg&w=96&q=75)
![ian](/_next/image?url=https%3A%2F%2Favatars.slack-edge.com%2F2023-09-04%2F5847803218243_3909d9c2338267302940_192.png&w=96&q=75)
f(x)=e^x
1 unit to the left, you’re left with g(x)=e^(x+1)
(Fig. A). This transformation is pretty simple; the new line is 1 unit away. However, it’s only 1 unit away horizontally. Vertically, it varies depending on the x value. The vertical difference at x=-1 is a lot smaller than the vertical difference at x=1.
On this recent #hack-night, @carrot and I set out to transform f(x)
so that at any point along f(x)
, the distance to the closest point on g(x)
is equal to 1. Essentially, g(x)
is 1 unit away throughout, not horizontally (Fig. B).
This proved to be quite difficult. There were a lot of quadratics that needed solving, and we also had to use the pythagorean theorem to get some distances. He can probably explain the math behind it a lot better than I can.
Anyways, here are a few links if you want to try it out:
• Exponential Functions - www.desmos.com/calculator/euke7u53si
• Quadratic Functions - www.desmos.com/calculator/jekjpm1mj0
• Linear Functions - www.desmos.com/calculator/oljptwxhji
• Circles - www.desmos.com/calculator/uedqiqjjxk (I think)