Derivative for Product rule a new one?

Click For Summary

Discussion Overview

The discussion revolves around the derivation of a formula for the nth order derivative of a product of two functions, specifically exploring the application of the product rule in calculus. Participants examine the validity of a proposed formula and its relation to established rules in calculus.

Discussion Character

  • Exploratory
  • Technical explanation
  • Debate/contested

Main Points Raised

  • One participant proposes a formula for the nth order derivative of a product of two functions, suggesting it may not be widely recognized.
  • Another participant identifies the proposed formula as the Leibniz product rule, indicating it is commonly found in calculus literature.
  • A participant expresses confusion about the formula and its components, noting discrepancies with the standard notation and limits of the summation.
  • Further replies clarify that the "extra terms" mentioned by the original poster are already included in the sigma notation of the Leibniz formula, and point out a potential error in the original post regarding notation.
  • One participant acknowledges the feedback and expresses understanding, while also noting the condition that the formula applies for n > 1.

Areas of Agreement / Disagreement

Participants do not reach a consensus on the correctness of the original formula proposed. There is acknowledgment of the established Leibniz rule, but the discussion remains open regarding the specifics of the nth order derivative and the original poster's contributions.

Contextual Notes

There are indications of confusion regarding the notation and the limits of summation in the proposed formula. The discussion also highlights the potential for misunderstanding in the application of the product rule for derivatives.

Who May Find This Useful

This discussion may be of interest to students studying calculus, particularly those exploring advanced topics such as higher-order derivatives and the product rule.

Baharx
Messages
10
Reaction score
0
i found a formula but I'm not sure is and maybe this is exist i don't know.

we know it F(x)= f(x).g(x) → F'(x)= f'(x).g(x)+g'(x).f(x)

and i want to calculate nth order.


n>1
fn(x).g(x)+ [itex]\sum^{n}_{k=1}[/itex] binomial coefficient
[itex]\left(n k\right)[/itex]. f(n-k)(x).gk(x)+ gn.f(x)


is it true? and i found myself but I'm sure this formula is exist.:rolleyes:
 
Physics news on Phys.org
oh, i didnt know that. i studying Calculus and that was an exercise. Leibniz? anyway.

first i found on wikipedia this : http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Difference_quotient

but i didn't understand then 6 hours i did get a fix on this exercise.
Thank you for reply.

but I'm seeing just sigma, where is fn(x).g(x) and gn(x).f(x) i added these.

and i started k=1 and Mr.Leibniz started k=0.
 
Your "extra terms" are contained in the sigma notation of the Leibniz formula. (In fact, since your summation goes all the way up to n, you have actually counted the last term twice. Also, there is an error in your first post - you wrote g^n(x), not g^n(x)f(x).) Even though you're not the first to derive this result, good on you for figuring it out yourself.
 
Mute said:
Your "extra terms" are contained in the sigma notation of the Leibniz formula. (In fact, since your summation goes all the way up to n, you have actually counted the last term twice. Also, there is an error in your first post - you wrote g^n(x), not g^n(x)f(x).) Even though you're not the first to derive this result, good on you for figuring it out yourself.

Thank you, i understand but besides i wrote n>1 condition. This is why first derivative can't be find this formula. but i tried it's working 3th order and nth order :rolleyes:

Thank you again.
 
but i understand. Thanks for the help. i want to study for master degree department of math. but i think i must study work hard.
 

Similar threads

  • · Replies 3 ·
Replies
3
Views
3K
  • · Replies 7 ·
Replies
7
Views
2K
  • · Replies 3 ·
Replies
3
Views
2K
  • · Replies 9 ·
Replies
9
Views
3K
  • · Replies 4 ·
Replies
4
Views
2K
  • · Replies 10 ·
Replies
10
Views
3K
  • · Replies 5 ·
Replies
5
Views
3K
  • · Replies 11 ·
Replies
11
Views
3K
  • · Replies 11 ·
Replies
11
Views
2K
  • · Replies 1 ·
Replies
1
Views
3K