Let f\left( x \right) = \left\{ {\matrix{ { - 1} & { - 2 \le x < 0} \cr {{x^2} - 1,} & {0 \le x \le 2} \cr } } \right. and g(x)=∣f(x)∣+f(∣x∣). Then, in the interval (–2, 2), g is :
Options
Solution
Key Concepts and Formulas
Definition of Absolute Value:∣a∣=a if a≥0, and ∣a∣=−a if a<0.
Continuity of a Function: A function f(x) is continuous at a point c if limx→c−f(x)=limx→c+f(x)=f(c). For piecewise functions, continuity needs to be checked at the points where the definition changes.
Differentiability of a Function: A function f(x) is differentiable at a point c if the limit of the difference quotient exists: f′(c)=limh→0hf(c+h)−f(c). For piecewise functions, differentiability needs to be checked at the points where the definition changes by comparing the left-hand and right-hand derivatives. A function must be continuous at a point to be differentiable at that point.
Step-by-Step Solution
We are given the function f(x) defined as:
f(x) = \left\{ {\matrix{ - 1} & { - 2 \le x < 0} \cr {{x^2} - 1,} & {0 \le x \le 2} \cr } } \right.
We need to find the function g(x)=∣f(x)∣+f(∣x∣) in the interval (–2, 2) and determine its continuity and differentiability.
Step 1: Analyze ∣f(x)∣
We need to find the expression for ∣f(x)∣ based on the definition of f(x).
For −2≤x<0, f(x)=−1. So, ∣f(x)∣=∣−1∣=1.
For 0≤x≤2, f(x)=x2−1.
When x2−1≥0, i.e., x2≥1. In the interval [0,2], this occurs when 1≤x≤2. In this case, ∣f(x)∣=x2−1.
When x2−1<0, i.e., x2<1. In the interval [0,2], this occurs when 0≤x<1. In this case, ∣f(x)∣=−(x2−1)=1−x2.
Step 2: Analyze f(∣x∣)
We need to find the expression for f(∣x∣) for x∈[−2,2]. The argument of f is ∣x∣.
If ∣x∣∈[−2,0), this is not possible since ∣x∣≥0.
If ∣x∣∈[0,2], then f(∣x∣)=(∣x∣)2−1=x2−1.
Since x∈[−2,2], ∣x∣ will always be in [0,2].
Thus, for all x∈[−2,2], f(∣x∣)=x2−1.
Step 3: Determine g(x)
Now we combine ∣f(x)∣ and f(∣x∣) to get g(x)=∣f(x)∣+f(∣x∣). We need to consider the intervals defined by the piecewise functions. The critical points are x=−2,0,1,2.
Interval 1: −2≤x<0
Here, ∣f(x)∣=1 and f(∣x∣)=x2−1.
So, g(x)=1+(x2−1)=x2.
Interval 2: 0≤x<1
Here, ∣f(x)∣=1−x2 and f(∣x∣)=x2−1.
So, g(x)=(1−x2)+(x2−1)=0.
Interval 3: 1≤x≤2
Here, ∣f(x)∣=x2−1 and f(∣x∣)=x2−1.
So, g(x)=(x2−1)+(x2−1)=2(x2−1).
Thus, the function g(x) in the interval [−2,2] is:
g(x) = \left\{ {\matrix{ {{x^2}} & , & { - 2 \le x < 0} \cr {0} & , & {0 \le x < 1} \cr {2\left( {{x^2} - 1} \right)} & , & {1 \le x \le 2} \cr } } \right.
Step 4: Check Continuity of g(x) in (–2, 2)
We need to check continuity at the points where the definition of g(x) changes, which are x=0 and x=1.
At x=0:
Left-hand limit: limx→0−g(x)=limx→0−x2=02=0.
Right-hand limit: limx→0+g(x)=limx→0+0=0.
Function value: g(0)=0 (from the second case 0≤x<1).
Since limx→0−g(x)=limx→0+g(x)=g(0)=0, g(x) is continuous at x=0.
Function value: g(1)=2(12−1)=0 (from the third case 1≤x≤2).
Since limx→1−g(x)=limx→1+g(x)=g(1)=0, g(x) is continuous at x=1.
The function g(x) is defined by polynomials in the intervals (−2,0), [0,1), and [1,2]. Polynomials are continuous everywhere. We have verified continuity at the transition points. Therefore, g(x) is continuous in the interval (–2, 2).
Step 5: Check Differentiability of g(x) in (–2, 2)
We need to check differentiability at the points where the definition of g(x) changes, which are x=0 and x=1.
At x=0:
First, since g(x) is continuous at x=0, we can proceed to check differentiability.
Left-hand derivative:
g′(0−)=limh→0−hg(0+h)−g(0)=limh→0−hg(h)−0.
For h<0, g(h)=h2.
g′(0−)=limh→0−hh2=limh→0−h=0.
Right-hand derivative:
g′(0+)=limh→0+hg(0+h)−g(0)=limh→0+hg(h)−0.
For h>0 (and close to 0), g(h)=0.
g′(0+)=limh→0+h0=0.
Since g′(0−)=g′(0+)=0, g(x) is differentiable at x=0.
At x=1:
First, since g(x) is continuous at x=1, we can proceed to check differentiability.
Left-hand derivative:
g′(1−)=limh→0−hg(1+h)−g(1)=limh→0−hg(1+h)−0.
For h<0 (and ∣h∣ small), 1+h is in [0,1). So g(1+h)=0.
g′(1−)=limh→0−h0=0.
Right-hand derivative:
g′(1+)=limh→0+hg(1+h)−g(1)=limh→0+hg(1+h)−0.
For h>0 (and ∣h∣ small), 1+h is in [1,2]. So g(1+h)=2((1+h)2−1).
g′(1+)=limh→0+h2((1+h)2−1)=limh→0+h2(1+2h+h2−1)g′(1+)=limh→0+h2(2h+h2)=limh→0+2(2+h)=2(2+0)=4.
Since g′(1−)=0 and g′(1+)=4, the left-hand derivative and the right-hand derivative are not equal. Therefore, g(x) is not differentiable at x=1.
Step 6: Analyze the overall behavior in (–2, 2)
We found that g(x) is continuous in the interval (–2, 2).
We found that g(x) is differentiable at x=0.
We found that g(x) is not differentiable at x=1.
Therefore, in the interval (–2, 2), g(x) is continuous but not differentiable at one point (x=1).
The question asks about the nature of g in the interval (–2, 2).
(A) non continuous: This is false, as we showed g is continuous.
(B) differentiable at all points: This is false, as g is not differentiable at x=1.
(C) not differentiable at two points: This is false, as it's only not differentiable at one point.
(D) not differentiable at one point: This is true.
However, the provided correct answer is (A) non continuous. Let's re-examine our steps carefully, especially the definition of f(x) and the interval. The interval is (–2, 2).
Let's re-evaluate the continuity of g(x) at the boundaries of the defined intervals.
g(x) = \left\{ {\matrix{ {{x^2}} & , & { - 2 \le x < 0} \cr {0} & , & {0 \le x < 1} \cr {2\left( {{x^2} - 1} \right)} & , & {1 \le x \le 2} \cr } } \right.
We checked continuity at x=0 and x=1 and found it to be continuous.
Let's re-check the calculation of f(∣x∣).
f(x) = \left\{ {\matrix{ - 1} & { - 2 \le x < 0} \cr {{x^2} - 1,} & {0 \le x \le 2} \cr } } \right.
For x∈(−2,2), ∣x∣∈[0,2).
So, for x∈(−2,0), ∣x∣∈(0,2). Then f(∣x∣)=(∣x∣)2−1=x2−1.
For x∈[0,2), ∣x∣∈[0,2). Then f(∣x∣)=(∣x∣)2−1=x2−1.
So, f(∣x∣)=x2−1 for x∈(−2,2). This seems correct.
Let's re-check ∣f(x)∣.
For −2≤x<0, f(x)=−1, so ∣f(x)∣=1.
For 0≤x<1, f(x)=x2−1, which is negative. So ∣f(x)∣=−(x2−1)=1−x2.
For 1≤x≤2, f(x)=x2−1, which is non-negative. So ∣f(x)∣=x2−1.
Let's re-calculate g(x)=∣f(x)∣+f(∣x∣) for x∈(−2,2).
The interval is (–2, 2). The points where the definition of f(x) and ∣f(x)∣ changes are 0 and 1.
Case 1: −2<x<0.
∣f(x)∣=1.
f(∣x∣)=x2−1 (since ∣x∣∈(0,2)).
g(x)=1+(x2−1)=x2.
Case 2: 0≤x<1.
∣f(x)∣=1−x2.
f(∣x∣)=x2−1 (since ∣x∣∈[0,1)).
g(x)=(1−x2)+(x2−1)=0.
Case 3: 1≤x<2.
∣f(x)∣=x2−1.
f(∣x∣)=x2−1 (since ∣x∣∈[1,2)).
g(x)=(x2−1)+(x2−1)=2(x2−1).
Let's re-check continuity at x=0:
limx→0−g(x)=limx→0−x2=0.
limx→0+g(x)=limx→0+0=0.
g(0)=0. Continuous at x=0.
Let's re-check continuity at x=1:
limx→1−g(x)=limx→1−0=0.
limx→1+g(x)=limx→1+2(x2−1)=2(12−1)=0.
g(1)=2(12−1)=0. Continuous at x=1.
My previous analysis of continuity seems correct. The function g(x) is continuous in the interval (–2, 2). This contradicts the provided correct answer (A) non continuous.
Let me carefully re-read the question and the definition of f(x).
f\left( x \right) = \left\{ {\matrix{ { - 1} & { - 2 \le x < 0} \cr {{x^2} - 1,} & {0 \le x \le 2} \cr } } \right.
The interval of interest for g(x) is (–2, 2).
Let's consider the definition of f(∣x∣) again.
For x∈(−2,2), ∣x∣∈[0,2).
If 0≤∣x∣<2, then f(∣x∣)=(∣x∣)2−1=x2−1.
This holds for all x∈(−2,2). So f(∣x∣)=x2−1 for x∈(−2,2). This part is correct.
Let's reconsider the definition of ∣f(x)∣ for x∈(−2,2).
If −2≤x<0, then f(x)=−1, so ∣f(x)∣=1.
If 0≤x≤2, then f(x)=x2−1.
If 0≤x<1, then x2−1<0, so ∣f(x)∣=−(x2−1)=1−x2.
If 1≤x≤2, then x2−1≥0, so ∣f(x)∣=x2−1.
Now, let's construct g(x)=∣f(x)∣+f(∣x∣) specifically for the interval x∈(−2,2).
Sub-interval 1: −2<x<0.
Here, ∣f(x)∣=1.
And f(∣x∣)=x2−1 (since ∣x∣=−x∈(0,2)).
So, g(x)=1+(x2−1)=x2.
Sub-interval 2: 0≤x<1.
Here, ∣f(x)∣=1−x2.
And f(∣x∣)=x2−1 (since ∣x∣=x∈[0,1)).
So, g(x)=(1−x2)+(x2−1)=0.
Sub-interval 3: 1≤x<2.
Here, ∣f(x)∣=x2−1.
And f(∣x∣)=x2−1 (since ∣x∣=x∈[1,2)).
So, g(x)=(x2−1)+(x2−1)=2(x2−1).
Let's check the continuity again at x=0:
limx→0−g(x)=limx→0−x2=0.
limx→0+g(x)=limx→0+0=0.
g(0)=0. Continuous at x=0.
Let's check the continuity again at x=1:
limx→1−g(x)=limx→1−0=0.
limx→1+g(x)=limx→1+2(x2−1)=2(1−1)=0.
g(1)=2(12−1)=0. Continuous at x=1.
My analysis consistently shows that g(x) is continuous on the interval (–2, 2). If the correct answer is indeed (A) non continuous, there must be a mistake in my interpretation or calculation.
Let's consider the possibility that the question implies the interval [−2,2] for the definition of f(x) and g(x), and then asks about the behavior in the open interval (−2,2).
Let's re-examine the definition of f(x). The domain of f(x) is [−2,2].
The function g(x)=∣f(x)∣+f(∣x∣).
The domain of ∣f(x)∣ is [−2,2].
The domain of f(∣x∣) requires ∣x∣ to be in the domain of f, so ∣x∣∈[−2,2], which means x∈[−2,2].
Thus, the domain of g(x) is [−2,2]. We are asked about the interval (–2, 2).
Let's check the continuity at x=−2 and x=2 just for completeness, although the question is about the open interval.
At x=−2:
g(−2)=(−2)2=4.
limx→−2+g(x)=limx→−2+x2=(−2)2=4.
So, it is continuous from the right at x=−2.
At x=2:
We need to consider the definition of f(x) up to x=2.
g(x)=2(x2−1) for 1≤x≤2.
g(2)=2(22−1)=2(3)=6.
limx→2−g(x)=limx→2−2(x2−1)=2(22−1)=6.
So, it is continuous from the left at x=2.
Let's consider the possibility of a typo in the question or the provided answer. However, I must work towards the given answer.
If g(x) is non-continuous, there must be a jump discontinuity at one of the points x=0 or x=1. My calculations show that the limits match the function values at these points.
Let me critically re-evaluate the calculation of ∣f(x)∣.
f(x) = \left\{ {\matrix{ - 1} & { - 2 \le x < 0} \cr {{x^2} - 1,} & {0 \le x \le 2} \cr } } \right.
Consider x slightly less than 0, say x=−0.1.
f(−0.1)=−1. ∣f(−0.1)∣=1.
∣x∣=0.1. f(∣x∣)=f(0.1)=(0.1)2−1=0.01−1=−0.99.
g(−0.1)=∣f(−0.1)∣+f(∣−0.1∣)=1+(−0.99)=0.01.
Using my formula g(x)=x2 for −2<x<0:
g(−0.1)=(−0.1)2=0.01. This matches.
Consider x slightly greater than 0, say x=0.1.
f(0.1)=(0.1)2−1=−0.99. ∣f(0.1)∣=∣−0.99∣=0.99.
∣x∣=0.1. f(∣x∣)=f(0.1)=(0.1)2−1=−0.99.
g(0.1)=∣f(0.1)∣+f(∣0.1∣)=0.99+(−0.99)=0.
Using my formula g(x)=0 for 0≤x<1:
g(0.1)=0. This matches.
Consider x slightly less than 1, say x=0.9.
f(0.9)=(0.9)2−1=0.81−1=−0.19. ∣f(0.9)∣=∣−0.19∣=0.19.
∣x∣=0.9. f(∣x∣)=f(0.9)=(0.9)2−1=−0.19.
g(0.9)=∣f(0.9)∣+f(∣0.9∣)=0.19+(−0.19)=0.
Using my formula g(x)=0 for 0≤x<1:
g(0.9)=0. This matches.
Consider x slightly greater than 1, say x=1.1.
f(1.1)=(1.1)2−1=1.21−1=0.21. ∣f(1.1)∣=0.21.
∣x∣=1.1. f(∣x∣)=f(1.1)=(1.1)2−1=0.21.
g(1.1)=∣f(1.1)∣+f(∣1.1∣)=0.21+0.21=0.42.
Using my formula g(x)=2(x2−1) for 1≤x<2:
g(1.1)=2((1.1)2−1)=2(1.21−1)=2(0.21)=0.42. This matches.
My calculations for g(x) and its continuity at x=0 and x=1 seem robust. It is possible that the question or the given answer is incorrect. However, if I am forced to arrive at "non continuous", I need to find a flaw.
Let's assume, for the sake of reaching the answer, that there is a discontinuity. This implies that at least one of the limits at x=0 or x=1 does not match the function value or the other limit.
Let's review the calculation of f(∣x∣) once more.
f(x)={−1x2−1−2≤x<00≤x≤2
We are considering x∈(−2,2). So ∣x∣∈[0,2).
If ∣x∣∈[0,2), then f(∣x∣)=(∣x∣)2−1=x2−1. This is correct.
Let's review the calculation of ∣f(x)∣ for x∈(−2,2).
If −2<x<0, then f(x)=−1, so ∣f(x)∣=1.
If 0≤x<1, then f(x)=x2−1<0, so ∣f(x)∣=−(x2−1)=1−x2.
If 1≤x<2, then f(x)=x2−1≥0, so ∣f(x)∣=x2−1.
These piecewise definitions of ∣f(x)∣ and f(∣x∣) lead to the g(x) that I derived:
g(x)=⎩⎨⎧x202(x2−1)−2<x<00≤x<11≤x<2
Let's consider the possibility of an error in the problem statement itself, or a subtle interpretation of the interval. The interval is (–2, 2).
Could there be an issue with the definition of f(x) at the endpoints of its own domain?
f(−2)=−1.
f(0)=02−1=−1.
f(2)=22−1=3.
Let's re-examine the original solution provided. It states:
"It is not differentiable at x = 1" (this part matches my finding).
However, the correct answer is (A) non continuous. This means my continuity check must be flawed.
Let's focus on continuity at x=0 and x=1 again.
At x=0:
limx→0−g(x)=limx→0−x2=0.
limx→0+g(x)=limx→0+0=0.
g(0)=0. This is continuous.
At x=1:
limx→1−g(x)=limx→1−0=0.
limx→1+g(x)=limx→1+2(x2−1)=2(1−1)=0.
g(1)=2(12−1)=0. This is continuous.
There seems to be a fundamental discrepancy. If the correct answer is (A) non continuous, then there must be a discontinuity at x=0 or x=1 (or both).
Let's consider the possibility that the question is designed to trick by the definition of f(∣x∣).
f(x)=−1 for −2≤x<0.
f(x)=x2−1 for 0≤x≤2.
Let's consider f(∣x∣) for x∈(−2,2).
If x∈(−2,0), then ∣x∣=−x∈(0,2).
So f(∣x∣)=f(−x)=(−x)2−1=x2−1.
If x∈[0,2), then ∣x∣=x∈[0,2).
So f(∣x∣)=f(x)=x2−1.
This confirms f(∣x∣)=x2−1 for all x∈(−2,2).
Let's think about the absolute value function ∣f(x)∣.
For −2≤x<0, f(x)=−1, so ∣f(x)∣=1.
For 0≤x<1, f(x)=x2−1<0, so ∣f(x)∣=−(x2−1)=1−x2.
For 1≤x<2, f(x)=x2−1≥0, so ∣f(x)∣=x2−1.
Combining these for g(x)=∣f(x)∣+f(∣x∣) for x∈(−2,2):
For −2<x<0: g(x)=1+(x2−1)=x2.
For 0≤x<1: g(x)=(1−x2)+(x2−1)=0.
For 1≤x<2: g(x)=(x2−1)+(x2−1)=2(x2−1).
The function g(x) is indeed continuous at x=0 and x=1.
If the correct answer is (A) non continuous, then my entire approach to deriving g(x) might be missing a subtle point, or the question/answer is flawed.
Let's consider the possibility that the definition of f(x) has an issue at x=0.
f(x) is defined as −1 for −2≤x<0.
f(x) is defined as x2−1 for 0≤x≤2.
At x=0, the first definition gives a limit of −1 as x→0−.
The second definition gives f(0)=02−1=−1.
So f(x) is continuous at x=0.
Let's consider the definition of ∣f(x)∣ and f(∣x∣) at x=0.
∣f(0)∣=∣−1∣=1.
f(∣0∣)=f(0)=−1.
g(0)=∣f(0)∣+f(∣0∣)=1+(−1)=0.
Let's consider x approaching 0 from the left (x→0−).
∣f(x)∣→∣−1∣=1.
∣x∣→0+.
f(∣x∣)→f(0)=−1.
So g(x)→1+(−1)=0.
Let's consider x approaching 0 from the right (x→0+).
f(x)=x2−1→−1.
∣f(x)∣→∣−1∣=1.
∣x∣→0+.
f(∣x∣)→f(0)=−1.
So g(x)→1+(−1)=0.
Let's consider x approaching 1 from the left (x→1−).
f(x)=x2−1→0−.
∣f(x)∣=∣x2−1∣=1−x2→0+.
∣x∣→1−.
f(∣x∣)=x2−1→0−.
So g(x)→0+0=0.
Let's consider x approaching 1 from the right (x→1+).
f(x)=x2−1→0+.
∣f(x)∣=x2−1→0+.
∣x∣→1+.
f(∣x∣)=x2−1→0+.
So g(x)→0+0=0.
This confirms continuity at x=1.
Given the discrepancy with the provided answer, it is highly probable that there is an error in the question or the stated correct answer. Based on standard definitions of continuity and differentiability, the function g(x) appears to be continuous in the interval (–2, 2) and not differentiable at x=1. This would correspond to option (D).
However, if forced to select (A) non continuous, I would have to assume a calculation error that I am not finding. Let me assume there is a discontinuity at x=0. For that to happen, either limx→0−g(x)=limx→0+g(x) or limx→0g(x)=g(0).
Let's re-write the structure of g(x) very carefully.
g(x)=∣f(x)∣+f(∣x∣)
Consider the interval [−2,2].
f(x)={−1x2−1−2≤x<00≤x≤2
∣f(x)∣={∣−1∣=1∣x2−1∣−2≤x<00≤x≤2∣x2−1∣={−(x2−1)=1−x2x2−10≤x<11≤x≤2
So, ∣f(x)∣=⎩⎨⎧11−x2x2−1−2≤x<00≤x<11≤x≤2
f(∣x∣). For x∈[−2,2], ∣x∣∈[0,2].
If 0≤∣x∣≤2, then f(∣x∣)=(∣x∣)2−1=x2−1.
This holds for all x∈[−2,2].
Now, g(x)=∣f(x)∣+f(∣x∣) for x∈(−2,2).
Case 1: −2<x<0.
g(x)=1+(x2−1)=x2.
Case 2: 0≤x<1.
g(x)=(1−x2)+(x2−1)=0.
Case 3: 1≤x<2.
g(x)=(x2−1)+(x2−1)=2(x2−1).
The function g(x) is exactly as derived. The continuity at x=0 and x=1 holds. The non-differentiability at x=1 also holds.
If the answer is (A) non continuous, there must be a point of discontinuity. Given the structure of the problem and the common points of discontinuity arising from absolute values and piecewise definitions, x=0 and x=1 are the only candidates. Since my checks show continuity, I cannot logically derive answer (A).
Let me consider if there is any implicit assumption about the interval. The question asks "Then, in the interval (–2, 2), g is :".
Let's assume there is a mistake in the given solution and proceed with my findings.
My findings are: g(x) is continuous in (–2, 2) and not differentiable at x=1.
If the provided answer (A) is indeed correct, then my derivation of g(x) or my continuity check must be wrong.
Let's re-trace the f(∣x∣) part.
f(x)={−1x2−1−2≤x<00≤x≤2
Consider x∈(−2,2).
If x∈(−2,0), then ∣x∣=−x∈(0,2). So f(∣x∣)=f(−x)=(−x)2−1=x2−1.
If x∈[0,2), then ∣x∣=x∈[0,2). So f(∣x∣)=f(x)=x2−1.
This confirms f(∣x∣)=x2−1 for x∈(−2,2).
Let's re-trace the ∣f(x)∣ part for x∈(−2,2).
If −2<x<0, f(x)=−1, so ∣f(x)∣=1.
If 0≤x<1, f(x)=x2−1, and x2−1<0, so ∣f(x)∣=−(x2−1)=1−x2.
If 1≤x<2, f(x)=x2−1, and x2−1≥0, so ∣f(x)∣=x2−1.
The construction of g(x) and its continuity checks appear correct.
Given the constraint that the provided answer is correct, and my derivations consistently point to continuity, I am unable to provide a step-by-step derivation that leads to option (A). My detailed analysis leads to the conclusion that g(x) is continuous in (–2, 2) and not differentiable at one point.
However, if I were forced to make it non-continuous, I would suspect an error in how f(∣x∣) is evaluated or how ∣f(x)∣ is evaluated.
Let's assume there is a subtle error in the definition of f(∣x∣).
Suppose for x∈(−2,0), ∣x∣∈(0,2), and we use the second case of f.
Suppose for x∈[0,2), ∣x∣∈[0,2), and we use the second case of f.
This leads to f(∣x∣)=x2−1.
Let's revisit the original solution's statement for ∣f(x)∣:
|f(x)| = \left\{ {\matrix{ 1 & , & { - 2 \le x < 0} \cr {1 - {x^2}} & , & {0 \le x < 1} \cr {{x^2} - 1} & , & {1 \le x \le 2} \cr } } \right.
And for f(∣x∣):
f(∣x∣)=x2−1,x∈[−2,2]
These are precisely what I derived.
And the combined g(x):
g(x) = \left\{ {\matrix{ {{x^2}} & , & {x \in \left[ { - 2,0} \right]} \cr {0} & , & {x \in \left[ {0,1} \right)} \cr {2\left( {{x^2} - 1} \right)} & , & {x \in \left[ {1,2} \right]} \cr } } \right.
Note that the original solution uses inclusive brackets for x∈[−2,0] and [0,1). My interval is (−2,2).
For −2<x<0, g(x)=x2.
For 0≤x<1, g(x)=0.
For 1≤x<2, g(x)=2(x2−1).
The continuity at x=0:
limx→0−g(x)=limx→0−x2=0.
limx→0+g(x)=limx→0+0=0.
g(0)=0. Continuous.
The continuity at x=1:
limx→1−g(x)=limx→1−0=0.
limx→1+g(x)=limx→1+2(x2−1)=0.
g(1)=2(12−1)=0. Continuous.
It seems the provided correct answer is indeed incorrect based on the standard mathematical definitions and the given function. My derivation consistently shows continuity.
If I have to select the correct option from the given choices, and assuming there might be a very subtle point I am missing that leads to non-continuity, the most likely place for a discontinuity would be at the points where the definition of f(x) or ∣f(x)∣ changes, which are x=0 and x=1.
However, my calculations show continuity at both points.
Given the constraint to match the provided answer, I cannot proceed further without assuming an error in my fundamental understanding or calculation, which I have repeatedly checked. Therefore, I must conclude that based on my analysis, the function g(x) is continuous in the interval (–2, 2).
Since the problem requires me to output a step-by-step solution that leads to the correct answer, and I cannot logically reach the provided correct answer (A), I am unable to fulfill the request perfectly. However, I will summarize my findings based on my rigorous analysis.
Summary
The function g(x) is constructed by combining ∣f(x)∣ and f(∣x∣) over the interval (–2, 2). We derived the piecewise definition of g(x) as:
g(x) = \left\{ {\matrix{ {{x^2}} & , & { - 2 < x < 0} \cr {0} & , & {0 \le x < 1} \cr {2\left( {{x^2} - 1} \right)} & , & {1 \le x < 2} \cr } } \right.
Upon checking the continuity at the points where the definition changes (x=0 and x=1), we found that the left-hand limits, right-hand limits, and the function values all match, indicating that g(x) is continuous in the interval (–2, 2). We also checked differentiability and found that g(x) is not differentiable at x=1. This would lead to option (D). However, the provided correct answer is (A) non continuous. My detailed analysis does not support this conclusion. Assuming the provided correct answer is indeed (A), there must be a subtle error in my derivation or interpretation that is not apparent.