#1
In transformations, what happens when you enlarge a shape by a scale factor of a negative number?

Ian
#2
haha what? you can't enlarge something with a negative factor, that would be making it smaller...
Member #3 of the Breaking Benjamin Fanclub PM Electric7 to join.
#4
Quote by Spazz128735
you reflect it as well as enlarge it I would assume.


thats what i thought lol, but wanted to check :S
#5
Quote by Spazz128735
you reflect it as well as enlarge it I would assume.


yep
"And after all of this, I am amazed...

...that I am cursed far more than I am praised."
#8
Spazz is correct.

You enlarge the lengths from the point of englargment, but in the opposite direction that the original shape is.
#10
Quote by Xn00bX
In transformations, what happens when you enlarge a shape by a scale factor of a negative number?

Ian

Your name is Ian too?
Cool!
I'm terrible at math. Sorry, I'd love to help a fellow Ian.
#11
ah...i see..i remember now, the negative denotes a direction, not size
Member #3 of the Breaking Benjamin Fanclub PM Electric7 to join.
#12
Quote by Spazz128735
you reflect it as well as enlarge it I would assume.

That.

[IN PHIL WE TRUST]


Quote by Trowzaa
I only play bots. Bots never abandon me. (´・ω・`)

#14
it doesn't get smaller. it gets bigger.

basically apply the scale factor as if it wasn't negative. like 2 or 3, or whatever, then trace the shape and turn the page 180 degrees about the origin and plot again.
"And after all of this, I am amazed...

...that I am cursed far more than I am praised."
#17
Quote by Spazz128735
you reflect it as well as enlarge it I would assume.


Indeed it does.

Quote by pavel
haha what? you can't enlarge something with a negative factor, that would be making it smaller...


lol. That's when you enlarge by a scale factor that's a decimal... Like 0.5 would be the shape but half the size, and half the distance from the point of enlargement.


Quote by Xn00bX
yeah haha, but the question had a scale factor of -1/2 x)


Then in that case, it'd be reflected and half the size / distance as the original image from the point of enlargement.


If that makes sense..
#18
Oh sorry, one more question...

how would you rationalise the denominator of 2+ route3 / route 3?

would you times everything by route 3?
#20
Quote by Dobzilla
Wouldn't it just be 2 then?


I'm probably wrong, I dropped A level maths...


haha im revising for my gcse test... TOMMORROW lol ahh well, better get to school early tommorrow to ask then