Why don't pure mathematicians like to split derivatives?

  • Context: Undergrad 
  • Thread starter Thread starter KingBigness
  • Start date Start date
  • Tags Tags
    Splitting
Click For Summary

Discussion Overview

The discussion revolves around the concept of splitting derivatives, particularly in the context of implicit differentiation and the notation used in calculus. Participants explore the validity and implications of treating differentials like dx as quantities that can be manipulated, and the perspectives of pure mathematicians on this practice.

Discussion Character

  • Debate/contested
  • Conceptual clarification
  • Mathematical reasoning

Main Points Raised

  • One participant recalls a teacher suggesting that multiplying both sides of an equation by dx is acceptable, prompting curiosity about why pure mathematicians oppose this practice.
  • Another participant asserts that dx does not exist as a quantity and questions the validity of multiplying by something non-existent, emphasizing that the notation dy/dx is not a fraction.
  • A participant acknowledges the teacher's approach may have worked in specific cases but seeks clarification on whether it truly simplifies the notation or alters the meaning.
  • It is proposed that in certain advanced topics like nonstandard calculus and differential geometry, dx can be given meaning, suggesting that the teacher's explanation lacked depth.
  • One participant expresses discomfort with the idea that certain methods work only when not scrutinized by experts, indicating a desire for clarity on the topic.
  • A later reply raises a question about the relationship between derivatives and the expression dy=f'(x)dx, questioning whether this constitutes "splitting" the derivative.

Areas of Agreement / Disagreement

Participants do not reach a consensus on the validity of splitting derivatives. There are competing views regarding the existence and manipulation of dx, with some arguing against its use as a quantity and others suggesting it can have meaning in advanced contexts.

Contextual Notes

Participants acknowledge that the discussion involves nuanced interpretations of mathematical notation and concepts, with some expressing concern about the implications of treating differentials as quantities without proper context.

KingBigness
Messages
94
Reaction score
0
I remembered the other day that a while back my teacher (can't remember what topic, think it was implicit differentiation) had something like dy/dx and said to us that you could times both sides of the quation by dx as long as you don't tell any pure mathematician.

I was wondering why pure mathematicians don't like this if it gives the correct answer.

Sorry for the dodgy post I just can't remember all the details of what was going on as it was a few months ago.

Hope it isn't to unclear =S
 
Physics news on Phys.org
Aaaargh. Your teacher is correct: you shouldn't have told me that.

The reason is simply this: dx does not exist. It stands for nothing. So what are you multiplying with?? Something that doesn't exist.

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

is simply a notation, it is not a fraction

And it doesn't always give the right answer. For example the formula

[tex]\frac{\partial u}{\partial r}=\frac{\partial u}{\partial x}\frac{\partial x}{\partial r}+\frac{\partial u}{\partial y}\frac{\partial y}{\partial r}[/tex]

and this shows that we cannot simply scratch the [itex]\partial x[/itex] and [itex]\partial y[/itex] in the numerator.

Everybody who says that you can "just multiply by dx" is lying.
 
Ok I see I thought as much.
So is there a reason it worked in his case? Or did it really not change anything it just "simpfied" the notation.
 
Ps, sorry to cause you so much distress =P
 
KingBigness said:
Ok I see I thought as much.
So is there a reason it worked in his case? Or did it really not change anything it just "simpfied" the notation.

There is a deeper reason why it works. The idea is to give dx a meaning. This is done in nonstandard calculus and differential geometry. But these topics are usually not treated in a calculus course.

So your teacher is not completely wrong here. You can just multiply by dx and get the right answer. But he shouldn't have said that without explaining all the deeper theory. He should at least have mentioned that it isn't as trivial as you think. The last thing that I want you to think is that dx is some number and that [itex]\frac{dy}{dx}[/itex] is a fraction and that everything cancels out nicely. This is fundamentally false.


KingBigness said:
Ps, sorry to cause you so much distress =P

It's your teachers fault, not yours :biggrin:
 
Thanks for that explanation.
I understand it's not a number that's why I am asking this because I know he is wrong just wanted to know why. It unsettles me when people say, this works as long as you don't ask someone who is good at it
Haha

You seem like you know what you are talking about.
I have a partial derivative question I can't do and I have put it in the homework section to no avail.

Do you mind checking it out? It's called partial derivative proof, or I can pm you the question

Thank you again!
 
Sorry to revive a dead thread, I just thought you would be the best to answer my question as it follows along from my previous one.

You say you can't split dx because it 'doesn't exist'.

I have just started errors with derivatives. It says that the ratio of the two derivatives is actually the derivative of the function.

f'(x)=\frac{dy}{dx}

and the relationship between the two differentials can be given by

dy=f'(x)dx

Is this not 'splitting' the derivative?
 

Similar threads

  • · Replies 17 ·
Replies
17
Views
2K
  • · Replies 43 ·
2
Replies
43
Views
8K
  • · Replies 12 ·
Replies
12
Views
3K
  • · Replies 2 ·
Replies
2
Views
1K
  • · Replies 5 ·
Replies
5
Views
2K
  • · Replies 1 ·
Replies
1
Views
2K
  • · Replies 2 ·
Replies
2
Views
5K
  • · Replies 9 ·
Replies
9
Views
3K
  • · Replies 33 ·
2
Replies
33
Views
9K
  • · Replies 9 ·
Replies
9
Views
2K