Numerical Methods: 3 Point Formula

AI Thread Summary
The discussion revolves around using the 3-point formula to approximate the first derivative of a function in a Numerical Methods course. The user successfully applied the formula to the first three points but encountered difficulty with the fourth point due to the lack of subsequent values. A suggestion was made to apply the same method used for the first point, implying that a negative step size could be utilized. This approach raises questions about the validity of using negative increments in derivative approximations. The conversation highlights the challenges of numerical methods when boundary conditions limit available data points.
bobmerhebi
Messages
38
Reaction score
0
Hello there,

I am taking a Numerical Methods course & i had a lecture today when we did an example on the 3-point formula to approximate the 1st derivative of f.

the example included 4 given x's with their images by f. & we had to get all the images for the 1st derivative of f.

so we used one of the two 3-point formulas to get the values for f' for each of the first 3 x's. the last x was left without an attempt to get its f'(x).

So tonight i was wondering about how could I apply the formula to get it & its seems that I can't, after all either of the 3 point formula's requires the values of either the previous & following x or the two values following x. In either cases that's not possible as there's is no value after this particular x.

my question is whether there's some kind of solution to this & if so or not how so ?

P.S. this is Not a HW question but rather a help in my lecture.

Thank you
 
Mathematics news on Phys.org
To estimate f' for the 4th point, can't you use the same method as the 1st point? In other words, can't h be negative?
 
Thread 'Video on imaginary numbers and some queries'
Hi, I was watching the following video. I found some points confusing. Could you please help me to understand the gaps? Thanks, in advance! Question 1: Around 4:22, the video says the following. So for those mathematicians, negative numbers didn't exist. You could subtract, that is find the difference between two positive quantities, but you couldn't have a negative answer or negative coefficients. Mathematicians were so averse to negative numbers that there was no single quadratic...
Insights auto threads is broken atm, so I'm manually creating these for new Insight articles. In Dirac’s Principles of Quantum Mechanics published in 1930 he introduced a “convenient notation” he referred to as a “delta function” which he treated as a continuum analog to the discrete Kronecker delta. The Kronecker delta is simply the indexed components of the identity operator in matrix algebra Source: https://www.physicsforums.com/insights/what-exactly-is-diracs-delta-function/ by...
Thread 'Unit Circle Double Angle Derivations'
Here I made a terrible mistake of assuming this to be an equilateral triangle and set 2sinx=1 => x=pi/6. Although this did derive the double angle formulas it also led into a terrible mess trying to find all the combinations of sides. I must have been tired and just assumed 6x=180 and 2sinx=1. By that time, I was so mindset that I nearly scolded a person for even saying 90-x. I wonder if this is a case of biased observation that seeks to dis credit me like Jesus of Nazareth since in reality...
Back
Top