Applying the Chain Rule to y=(2x2+4x)5

In summary: You are really not going to be able to do calculus unless you have good facility with algebra. You did not realize that you could combine the factors 5 and 4 to give 20. Your previous posts had several algebra errors in them. I implore you to please follow Vela's advice and review algebra.In summary, the conversation discusses differentiating the function y=(2x2+4x)5 using the chain rule and finding the derivative dy/dx. The rule dy/dx=dy/du*du/dx is used, where U=2x2+4x and du/dx=4x+4. The resulting derivative is simplified to 5(2x2+4
  • #1
anthonyk2013
125
0
Differentiate the following by rule y=(2x2+4x)5

Is the chain rule the right rule to use?

dy/dx=dy/du*du/dx

Let U=2x2+4x

du/dx=4x+4

y=(u)5 → dy/du=5(u)4

dy/dx=5(u)4*4x+4

dy/dx=5(2x2+4x)4*4x+4

dy/dx= 30(2x2+4x)44x

dy/dx= 30(2x216x)4

I'm wondering if I am on the right track?
 
Physics news on Phys.org
  • #2
Anthonyk, your questions should be posted in the Homework & Coursework sections (Calculus & Beyond) - not in the technical math sections.
 
  • #3
Mark44 said:
Anthonyk, your questions should be posted in the Homework & Coursework sections (Calculus & Beyond) - not in the technical math sections.

ok no problem
 
  • #4
anthonyk2013 said:
Differentiate the following by rule y=(2x2+4x)5

Is the chain rule the right rule to use?

dy/dx=dy/du*du/dx

Let U=2x2+4x

du/dx=4x+4

y=(u)5 → dy/du=5(u)4

dy/dx=5(u)4*4x+4

dy/dx=5(2x2+4x)4*4x+4

dy/dx= 30(2x2+4x)44x

dy/dx= 30(2x216x)4

I'm wondering if I am on the right track?

I hope you did not mean what you wrote, which was
[tex] \frac{dy}{dx} = 5(x^2 + 4x)^4 4x + 4, \text{ which } = 4 +5(x^2 + 4x)^4 4x [/tex]
I hope you meant
[tex]\frac{dy}{dx} = 5(x^2 + 4x)^4 (4x + 4) [/tex]
If that is what you did mean, that is what you should write; note the parentheses.
 
  • #5
anthonyk2013 said:
Differentiate the following by rule y=(2x2+4x)5

Is the chain rule the right rule to use?

dy/dx=dy/du*du/dx

Let U=2x2+4x

du/dx=4x+4

y=(u)5 → dy/du=5(u)4

dy/dx=5(u)4*4x+4
Use parentheses where they are needed.
The right side should be 5u4 * (4x + 4)
anthonyk2013 said:
dy/dx=5(2x2+4x)4*4x+4
That last factor should be (4x + 4)
anthonyk2013 said:
dy/dx= 30(2x2+4x)44x
No. I can't tell what you did here. How did you get 30 at the beginning of the right side?
anthonyk2013 said:
dy/dx= 30(2x216x)4

I'm wondering if I am on the right track?
 
  • #6
anthonyk2013 said:
dy/dx=5(2x2+4x)4*4x+4

dy/dx= 30(2x2+4x)44x

dy/dx= 30(2x216x)4
In addition to what Ray noted, I can't figure out what you did to get the last two lines. You need to go back and review algebra.
 
  • #7
Ray Vickson said:
I hope you did not mean what you wrote, which was
[tex] \frac{dy}{dx} = 5(x^2 + 4x)^4 4x + 4, \text{ which } = 4 +5(x^2 + 4x)^4 4x [/tex]
I hope you meant
[tex]\frac{dy}{dx} = 5(x^2 + 4x)^4 (4x + 4) [/tex]
If that is what you did mean, that is what you should write; note the parentheses.

Ya sorry that is what I meant.

can I simplify this further or can I leave it like that?
 
  • #8
Ray Vickson said:
I hope you did not mean what you wrote, which was
[tex] \frac{dy}{dx} = 5(x^2 + 4x)^4 4x + 4, \text{ which } = 4 +5(x^2 + 4x)^4 4x [/tex]
I hope you meant
[tex]\frac{dy}{dx} = 5(x^2 + 4x)^4 (4x + 4) [/tex]
If that is what you did mean, that is what you should write; note the parentheses.
anthonyk2013 said:
Ya sorry that is what I meant.

can I simplify this further or can I leave it like that?
You can factor 4 out of the 4x + 4 term, and put it with the 5 factor. Otherwise, that's about all you can do. For most purposes, leaving it in factored form is preferable to multiplying everything out.
 
  • #9
Mark44 said:
You can factor 4 out of the 4x + 4 term, and put it with the 5 factor. Otherwise, that's about all you can do. For most purposes, leaving it in factored form is preferable to multiplying everything out.

dy/dx=20(2x2+4x)*(4x) this what you mean
 
  • #10
anthonyk2013 said:
dy/dx=20(2x2+4x)*(4x) this what you mean
No. Like vela said, you need to take some time to review algebra.

Starting from here:
dy/dx=5(2x2+4x)4 * (4x+4), factor 4 out of the last expression in parentheses, and combine that 4 with the leading 5. You did this, but the problem is that 4x + 4 ≠ 4*x. That seems to be what you're doing.
 
  • #11
Mark44 said:
No. Like vela said, you need to take some time to review algebra.

Starting from here:
dy/dx=5(2x2+4x)4 * (4x+4), factor 4 out of the last expression in parentheses, and combine that 4 with the leading 5. You did this, but the problem is that 4x + 4 ≠ 4*x. That seems to be what you're doing.

dy/dx=5+4(2x2+4x)44x

dy/dx=9(2x2+4x)44x

or

dy/dx=10x2+20x*(4x+4)
 
Last edited:
  • #12
none of those. take your time, just using rules of arithmetic that you are certain about. for example, (4x+4) = 4*(x+1) right? So then what does the equation look like?
 
  • #13
BruceW said:
none of those. take your time, just using rules of arithmetic that you are certain about. for example, (4x+4) = 4*(x+1) right? So then what does the equation look like?

I know this is probably very simple I just can't get it.

dy/dx=5(2x2+4x)*(4x+4)

Do I separate it out and treat 5(2x2+4x) from (4x+4)

5(2x2+4x)*4(x+1)?
 
  • #14
yeah, almost. you forgot the first bit should be to the power of four. so it is 5(2x2+4x)4*4(x+1) And yes, it is fine to 'separate out'. In arithmetic, it is always OK to say a*(b*c)=a*b*c i.e. in this case 5(2x2+4x)4*(4x+4) = 5(2x2+4x)4*4(x+1)
 
  • #15
BruceW said:
yeah, almost. you forgot the first bit should be to the power of four. so it is 5(2x2+4x)4*4(x+1) And yes, it is fine to 'separate out'. In arithmetic, it is always OK to say abc=a(bc) i.e. in this case 5(2x2+4x)4*(4x+4) = 5(2x2+4x)4*4(x+1)

5(2x2+4x)4*4(x+1)

Thanks very much, frustrating that its so simple. thanks again
 
  • #16
glad to have helped! yeah, I'm writing Makefiles at the moment, which should be a simple programming thing to do. But it's taking me ages! haha
 
  • #17
BruceW said:
glad to have helped! yeah, I'm writing Makefiles at the moment, which should be a simple programming thing to do. But it's taking me ages! haha

Best of luck.
 
  • #18
anthonyk2013 said:
Best of luck.
You are really not going to be able to do calculus unless you have good facility with algebra. You did not realize that you could combine the factors 5 and 4 to give 20. Your previous posts had several algebra errors in them. I implore you to please follow Vela's advice and review algebra.

Chet
 
  • #19
Chestermiller said:
You are really not going to be able to do calculus unless you have good facility with algebra. You did not realize that you could combine the factors 5 and 4 to give 20. Your previous posts had several algebra errors in them. I implore you to please follow Vela's advice and review algebra.

Chet


Thanks I have been looking over it today. It's just the work load of study, job and kids I can only do so much.

I can multiply 5*4 to get 20. Can I do anything with what in the bracket?
 
  • #20
anthonyk2013 said:
Thanks I have been looking over it today. It's just the work load of study, job and kids I can only do so much.

I can multiply 5*4 to get 20. Can I do anything with what in the bracket?
Yes, you can factor out a 2, and, when it comes out of the bracket, it becomes 24=16, which, when multiplied by the 20 becomes 320.

Chet
 
  • #21
anthonyk2013 said:
Thanks I have been looking over it today. It's just the work load of study, job and kids I can only do so much.
You'll be much more efficient at studying once you get the algebra down. You don't want to be wasting time struggling with algebra instead of concentrating on the material you're supposed to be learning. I'll note that with this problem, you had the calculus part — applying the chain rule — done correctly; it was only the subsequent algebra that was a problem. It might feel like reviewing algebra is a low priority, but you really should make it a higher one.
 
  • #22
I agree with what vela and Chet have said. I recognize that you have a lot of time constraints at the moment, with kids, job, and school, but a small amount of time spent at bolstering your algebra skills (say, 30 minutes of focused effort a day) will save a lot of time down the road.
 
  • Like
Likes 1 person
  • #23
I will try and put some time aside for algebra, thanks for advice and help I appreciate it. Cheers and happy st Patrick's day :-)
 

FAQ: Applying the Chain Rule to y=(2x2+4x)5

1. What is the Chain Rule?

The Chain Rule is a rule in calculus that allows us to find the derivative of a function that is composed of two or more functions. It states that the derivative of a composite function is equal to the derivative of the outer function multiplied by the derivative of the inner function.

2. How do you apply the Chain Rule?

To apply the Chain Rule, you first need to identify the outer function and the inner function. Then, you take the derivative of the outer function and multiply it by the derivative of the inner function. This will give you the derivative of the composite function.

3. What are the steps for applying the Chain Rule to y=(2x2+4x)5?

The steps for applying the Chain Rule to this function are as follows:

  1. Identify the outer function and the inner function (in this case, the outer function is raising to the power of 5 and the inner function is 2x2+4x).
  2. Take the derivative of the outer function, which will give us 5(2x2+4x)4.
  3. Take the derivative of the inner function, which will give us 4x+4.
  4. Multiply the two derivatives together to get the final derivative, which is 5(2x2+4x)4 * (4x+4).

4. Why is the Chain Rule important?

The Chain Rule is important because it allows us to find the derivative of more complex functions that are composed of simpler functions. This is especially useful in physics and engineering applications where functions may be composed of several different variables.

5. Can the Chain Rule be applied to any function?

Yes, the Chain Rule can be applied to any function that is composed of two or more functions. However, it may become more complicated for functions with multiple variables or non-standard functions.

Similar threads

Replies
7
Views
1K
Replies
14
Views
795
Replies
10
Views
1K
Replies
5
Views
993
Replies
5
Views
1K
Replies
25
Views
1K
Replies
1
Views
1K
Replies
4
Views
1K
Back
Top