Re: [Phys-l] definition of function

[Bernard Cleyet <bernardcleyet@redshift.com>]

Right (unique pairing);  thanks, I forgot.

"Note that in my world, abscissa doesn't necessarily mean x or
horizontal, and ordinate doesn't necessarily mean y or vertical."


bc, who also forgot the word argument (of a function).



John Denker wrote:

> On 08/09/2007 01:17 PM, Bernard Cleyet wrote:
>
>  
>
> > the context of magnetic hysteresis, it is OK to say we are plotting 
> > B versus H, but strictly speaking B is not a function of H (nor vice 
> > versa).
> >  http://www.irm.umn.edu/hg2m/hg2m_b/Image10.gif
> >
> > -
> >
> > please explain.
> >    
>
> Since you asked:
>
> A function, by definition, is a set of ordered pairs such that
> for each abscissa, there is only one ordinate.  
>
> That's the definition.  The term is often abused, but that doesn't
> change the definition.  I do /not/ think we should be open-minded
> about mutant definitions of this important term.
>
> Example:  The set {(1,1) (2,2) (3,1)} is a function.
>
>  
cut