Implicit diff (2 var), error or what?

  • Context: Undergrad 
  • Thread starter Thread starter trancefishy
  • Start date Start date
  • Tags Tags
    Error Implicit
Click For Summary

Discussion Overview

The discussion revolves around a homework problem involving implicit differentiation of the equation \(3x^2 - xy^3 + \sin(x^3 - y) = 4\) to find \(\frac{dy}{dx}\) and subsequently determining the slope at the point \((0, \pi)\). Participants explore whether the point is valid within the context of the original equation and the implications for finding the slope.

Discussion Character

  • Homework-related, Debate/contested, Exploratory

Main Points Raised

  • One participant presents their solution for \(\frac{dy}{dx}\) and questions the validity of evaluating it at the point \((0, \pi)\), noting that this point does not satisfy the original equation.
  • Another participant suggests using point-slope form to find the slope, but acknowledges the issue of the point not being on the graph.
  • Several participants emphasize that since \((0, \pi)\) is not on the curve defined by the original equation, the derivative calculated is irrelevant for that point.
  • One participant proposes taking the limit as \(x\) approaches 0 and \(y\) approaches \(2\pi\) to analyze the behavior of the slope, although this does not directly address the original problem.
  • Another participant concludes that the problem likely contains a typo, as the point must be on the curve for the derivative to be applicable.
  • One participant reinforces their conclusion by stating that the graph confirms the point is not valid.

Areas of Agreement / Disagreement

Participants generally agree that the point \((0, \pi)\) does not lie on the curve defined by the equation, leading to a consensus that the derivative at this point cannot be used. However, there is no explicit consensus on whether the problem is a typo or how to proceed from this point.

Contextual Notes

Participants express uncertainty regarding the implications of the point not being on the graph and the relevance of the derivative calculated. There are also unresolved discussions about alternative approaches, such as limits.

trancefishy
Messages
75
Reaction score
0
i am working on a homework assignment. it's easy, or, so i think...



Given.
[tex]3x^2 - xy^3 + sin(x^3 - y) = 4[/tex]

Find [tex]\frac{dy}{dx}[/tex]

not a problem. i ended up with

[tex]\frac{dy}{dx} = \frac {6x - y^3 + 3x^2 cos(x^3 - y)}{3xy^2 + cos(x^3 - y)}[/tex]

using implicit differention.

now, "What is the slope of the curve defined by the equation at the point [tex](0, \pi)[/tex]?"

at first, i plugged it into the derivative, ended up with [tex]\pi^3[/tex], but, upon inspection, i noticed that the point [tex](0, \pi)[/tex] does not exist in the original equation. am I to find the slope of the curve of the derivative, or is this a typo, or am i looking at this problem incorrectly? thanks.
 
Physics news on Phys.org
wouldn't you just use point slope form: [itex]y-y_{1} = m(x-x_{1})[/itex]? Just plug in the values into the derivative and work off from the above form?
 
um, point slope form looks messy, but that's besides the point. perhaps this wasn't clear enough. the point [tex](0, \pi)[/tex] doesn't exist in the original equation. not on the graph. [tex]sin(-\pi)[/tex] does not equal 4. that's the crux of my problem.

IF the point was on the original graph, no problem, plug the values into the derivative and what I get is [tex]\pi^3[/tex].
 
Last edited:
trancefishy said:
um, point slope form looks messy, but that's besides the point. perhaps this wasn't clear enough. the point [tex](0, \pi)[/tex] doesn't exist in the original equation. not on the graph. [tex]sin(-\pi)[/tex] does not equal 4. that's the crux of my problem.
Take the limit as x-> 0 and y -> Pi or look at the graph?
 
I think it is a typo. There are in infinite many tangent lines to a point... so the point would have to be on the curve in order for the derivative you found to be relavent.
 
looking at the graph is what caused me to realize the point isn't on there. it's not even close. now, as x approches 0 from the left, y approaches 2pi. the slope would also be increasing without bound. but that's for 2pi, which has no bearing on my problem.

it's becoming obvious to me that this must be a typo, though, it's so obviously incorrect i just dont' know how it got by
 
thank you, jameson
 

Similar threads

  • · Replies 2 ·
Replies
2
Views
4K
  • · Replies 16 ·
Replies
16
Views
3K
  • · Replies 6 ·
Replies
6
Views
3K
  • · Replies 3 ·
Replies
3
Views
2K
  • · Replies 4 ·
Replies
4
Views
5K
  • · Replies 6 ·
Replies
6
Views
4K
  • · Replies 1 ·
Replies
1
Views
2K
  • · Replies 1 ·
Replies
1
Views
2K
  • · Replies 1 ·
Replies
1
Views
2K
Replies
3
Views
3K