As being decreasing, it verifies that and thus is increasing.
Hey guys, I've been working on the topic of monotonicity, and I've got a bit of a grasp on using the definitions of strictly/monotonically increasing/decreasing to show which category a function falls into, but this one is slipping me, because it's not so much a composite function as a modification of an existing function...
I want to say that the monotonicity is reverse and that is monotonically increasing, because with reciprocal functions, where was small, will be large, and where was large, will be small.Given that is negative and monotonically decreasing, what can be said about the monotonicity of: ?
If that's even right, I'm not sure how to write the proof when I only have the definition in terms of 1 function, .
Any ideas?
Awesome, I think this is what my professor prefers at this stage in the course; though to be honest, the differentiation proof makes more sense to me. I need to become more acquainted with using the definitions in proofs, rather than my usual worded rationales.
Thanks again guys.