MHB Chain Rule in Difference Calculus

Click For Summary
SUMMARY

The discussion centers on the application of the chain rule in Difference Calculus, specifically regarding the composite function f(g(n)) where f(g(n)) = (n^2)^2. Dan initially misapplies the chain rule, leading to incorrect results when calculating the forward difference operator. The correct approach involves recognizing that the forward difference operator can be generalized to \Delta u(n) = u(n + h) - u(n), where h can be any real number, not just 1. This realization clarifies the relationship between Difference Calculus and Differential Calculus, highlighting that the chain rule does not directly apply to difference quotients.

PREREQUISITES
  • Understanding of Difference Calculus concepts
  • Familiarity with the chain rule in Differential Calculus
  • Knowledge of forward difference operators
  • Ability to manipulate polynomial functions
NEXT STEPS
  • Study the general form of forward difference operators in Difference Calculus
  • Explore the relationship between Difference Calculus and Differential Calculus
  • Learn about the application of the product and quotient rules in Difference Calculus
  • Investigate specific functions suitable for applying the chain rule in Difference Calculus
USEFUL FOR

Mathematicians, students of calculus, and educators seeking to understand the nuances of Difference Calculus and its relationship to Differential Calculus.

topsquark
Science Advisor
Homework Helper
Insights Author
MHB
Messages
2,020
Reaction score
843
I'm having some problems using the chain rule and I'm not sure where the trouble lies. For example:

If I'm not mistaken, if we have the composite function f(g(n)) then [math]\Delta f(g(n)) = \dfrac{ \Delta f(g) }{ \Delta g } \dfrac{ \Delta g(n) }{ \Delta n }[/math]

Let [math]f(g(n)) = (n^2)^2[/math]. Then [math]f(g) = g^2[/math] and [math]g(n) = n^2[/math]

[math]\Delta f(g(n)) = \dfrac{ \Delta g^2 }{ \Delta g } \dfrac{ \Delta n^2 }{ \Delta n }[/math]

Now, [math]\Delta g^2 = (g + 1)^2 - g^2 = 2g + 1[/math]. (And similarly for [math]\Delta n^2[/math].)

So
[math]\Delta f(g(n)) = (2g + 1)(2n + 1) = (2(n^2) + 1)(2n + 1) = 4 n^3 + 2 n^2 + 2 n + 1[/math]

But if we calculate [math]\Delta n^4[/math] from the definition:
[math]\Delta n^4 = (n + 1)^4 - n^4 = 4 n^3 + 6 n^2 + 4 n + 1[/math]

Where am I going wrong?

-Dan
 
Last edited by a moderator:
Physics news on Phys.org
Hey Dan,

It seems to me that the chain rule will not generally work for difference quotients. As I see it you basically have a counterexample that proves it.
What is your rationale to think it does?

Instead the chain rule applies to the derivative, which is the difference quotient taken to the limit.
In this case the highest order term represents the derivative, and that one is a match.
Perhaps a variant of the chain rule applies to difference quotients?
 
Klaas van Aarsen said:
Hey Dan,

It seems to me that the chain rule will not generally work for difference quotients. As I see it you basically have a counterexample that proves it.
What is your rationale to think it does?

Instead the chain rule applies to the derivative, which is the difference quotient taken to the limit.
In this case the highest order term represents the derivative, and that one is a match.
Perhaps a variant of the chain rule applies to difference quotients?
Well, the fact it doesn't seem to work would be explained by the fact that it doesn't work!

I'm trying to find relationships between Difference Calculus and Differential Calculus. It seemed reasonable that there should be a chain rule. After all there's a version of both the product and quotient rules. I figured there might be extra terms involved but the derivation was nearly identical to the derivation of the "usual" chain rule:
[math]\Delta f(g(n)) = \dfrac{ \Delta f(g(n)) }{ \Delta n } = \dfrac{f(g(n + 1)) - f(g(n))}{(n + 1) - n} = \dfrac{f(g(n + 1)) - f(g(n))}{g(n + 1) - g(n)} \dfrac{g(n + 1) - g(n)}{(n + 1) - n} = \dfrac{ \Delta f(g) }{ \Delta g } \dfrac{ \Delta g(n) }{ \Delta n }[/math]

Perhaps I'm too used to Differential Calculus but I see no reason why this shouldn't work.

So. Assuming my head isn't wrapped around this right, is there a way to take a difference operation of a composite function?

-Dan
 
Last edited by a moderator:
Okay, I know what's wrong now. I had to go through three or four derivations of the chain rule to figure it out and, of course, it was staring me in the face.

The forward difference operator I've been using is defined as [math]\Delta u(n) = u(n + 1) - u(n)[/math]. But there is a slightly more general form: [math]\Delta u(n) = u(n + h) - u(n)[/math] where h can be any real number (I suppose) though I've only seen it as an integer so far. This is where my problem was... If you look at my example you will see that I automatically set [math]\Delta g = (g + 1) - g = 1[/math]. But it isn't: [math]g = n^2[/math], so [math]\Delta g = 2n + 1[/math].

Here's how the derivation is supposed to work:
[math]\Delta n^4 = \Delta (n^2)^2 = \Delta f(g(x))[/math]. I will set [math]f(g) = g^2[/math] and [math]g(n) = n^2[/math].

[math]\dfrac{ \Delta f(g(n)) }{ \Delta n } = \dfrac{ f(g(n + 1)) - f(g(n))}{g(n + 1) - g(n)} \dfrac{g(n + 1) - g(n)}{(n + 1) - n}[/math]

The last factor is [math](n + 1)^2 - n^2 = 2n + 1[/math]. For the first factor, let [math]\Delta g = g(n + 1) - g(n)[/math]. Then
[math]\dfrac{f(g(n + 1)) - f(g(n)}{g(n + 1) - g(n)} = \dfrac{f(g(n) + \Delta g) - f(g(n))}{\Delta g}[/math] <----- This is [math]\dfrac{ \Delta f(g) }{ \Delta g }[/math]

[math] = \dfrac{(g + \Delta g)^2 - g^2}{\Delta g} = \dfrac{2 g \Delta g + ( \Delta g) ^2}{ \Delta g } = 2g + \Delta g = 2(n^2) + (2n + 1)[/math]

So
[math]\dfrac{ \Delta (n^2)^2 }{ \Delta n} = ( 2(n^2) + (2n + 1))(2n + 1) = 4n^3 + 2n^2 + 4n^2 + 2n + 2n + 1 = 4n^3 + 6n^2 + 4n + 1[/math]

as required.

It's a bit more difficult to use than the Differential version. And there are few functions you can actually use it for... Most functions don't have expressions for f(a + b), so I'm pretty much left with polynomials, exponentials, and factorials and I don't really need the chain rule for those. But the whole idea was to look at different Calculus rules for Difference Calculus.

-Dan
 
topsquark said:
Well, the fact it doesn't seem to work would be explained by the fact that it doesn't work!

I'm trying to find relationships between Difference Calculus and Differential Calculus. It seemed reasonable that there should be a chain rule. After all there's a version of both the product and quotient rules. I figured there might be extra terms involved but the derivation was nearly identical to the derivation of the "usual" chain rule:
[math]\Delta f(g(n)) = \dfrac{ \Delta f(g(n)) }{ \Delta n } = \dfrac{f(g(n + 1)) - f(g(n))}{(n + 1) - n} = \dfrac{f(g(n + 1)) - f(g(n))}{g(n + 1) - g(n)} \dfrac{g(n + 1) - g(n)}{(n + 1) - n} = \dfrac{ \Delta f(g) }{ \Delta g } \dfrac{ \Delta g(n) }{ \Delta n }[/math]

Perhaps I'm too used to Differential Calculus but I see no reason why this shouldn't work.

So. Assuming my head isn't wrapped around this right, is there a way to take a difference operation of a composite function?

-Dan

In your equations you have $f(g(n+1))-f(g(n))=\Delta f(g)$, but isn't it $\Delta f(g)= f(g+1)-f(g) = f(g(n)+1)-f(g(n))$ instead?
I think we should have $f(g(n+1)-g(n))=\Delta (f\circ g)(n)$.
 
Last edited:
Klaas van Aarsen said:
In your equations you have $f(g(n+1))-f(g(n))=\Delta f(g)$, but isn't $\Delta f(g)= f(g+1)-f(g) = f(g(n)+1)-f(g(n))$ instead?
I think we should have $f(g(n+1)-g(n))=\Delta (f\circ g)(n)$.
That's the place where I was screwing up. The [math]\dfrac{ \Delta f(g(n)) }{ \Delta n }[/math] does indeed use the difference [math]\Delta n = 1[/math]. But when we convert it to [math]\dfrac{ \Delta f(g) }{ \Delta g }[/math] then the difference of 1 gets redefined to the difference [math]\Delta g \neq 1[/math]. This isn't an issue in Differential Calculus because when we take the limit as h goes to 0 [math]\Delta x = \Delta g \to 0[/math].

-Dan
 
If there are an infinite number of natural numbers, and an infinite number of fractions in between any two natural numbers, and an infinite number of fractions in between any two of those fractions, and an infinite number of fractions in between any two of those fractions, and an infinite number of fractions in between any two of those fractions, and... then that must mean that there are not only infinite infinities, but an infinite number of those infinities. and an infinite number of those...

Similar threads

  • · Replies 1 ·
Replies
1
Views
1K
  • · Replies 4 ·
Replies
4
Views
1K
  • · Replies 1 ·
Replies
1
Views
727
Replies
1
Views
2K
  • · Replies 21 ·
Replies
21
Views
1K
Replies
1
Views
3K
  • · Replies 27 ·
Replies
27
Views
4K
Replies
6
Views
2K
Replies
7
Views
3K
  • · Replies 5 ·
Replies
5
Views
2K