|  | 
|   | |Store| |   |   |   |  |   |   |   |   
 
 
 CTK Exchange 
             |  | 
         	| 
            | 
            | Michael Klipper  guest
 
 | Jul-17-03, 08:56 PM (EST) |  |  |  | 3.  "RE: Y-Intercept" In response to message #2
 
 
 
      |  | I very much doubt that there is any better formula. Personally, I think the formula b = y1 - m*x1 is very nice.  While it does require calculation of the slope, you can look at it as saying you start from y1 and you run down a hill of slope m over a distance of x1 horizontal units.
 |  
 |  | Alert | IP | Printer-friendly page | Edit |
         Reply |
         Reply With Quote | Top |  |  |  | 
 
             |  | 
         	| 
            | 
            | Vladimir Member since Jun-22-03
 
 | Jul-18-03, 11:45 PM (EST) |  |        |  | 4.  "RE: Y-Intercept" In response to message #2
 
 
 
      |  | If the two points A, B are on a line through the origin, we have a direct proportionality yA/xA = yB/xB and the y-axis intercept of this line is q = 0. If the 2 points are not colinear with the origin, i.e., we do not have a direct proportionality, the y-axis intercept tells us the distance we would have to shift the origin and the x-axis up/down to achive the direct proportionality: (yA - q)/xA = (yB - q)/xB However, I do not see it as a much of an improvement |  
 |  | Alert | IP | Printer-friendly page | Edit |
         Reply |
         Reply With Quote | Top |  |  |  | 
 
 
 You may be curious to have a look at the old CTK Exchange archive.Please do not post there.
   
|Front page|
|Contents|
 
Copyright © 1996-2018 Alexander Bogomolny
 73353137 | 
 | 
 |