Differentiating with respect to time

AI Thread Summary
To differentiate rcos(θ) with respect to time, the chain rule is applied, which states that df/dt = (df/dθ)(dθ/dt). This means that if θ is a function of time and r is constant, the differentiation simplifies to df/dt = (d/dθ)(rcos(θ))(dθ/dt). If both r and θ depend on time, the differentiation becomes df/dt = (∂f/∂r)(dr/dt) + (∂f/∂θ)(dθ/dt). Understanding these relationships is crucial for correctly applying the chain rule in calculus. The discussion emphasizes the importance of recognizing dependencies when differentiating functions of multiple variables.
cabellos
Messages
76
Reaction score
1
How do you go about differentiating rcos$ with respect to time...?

In the book I am studying from it says d$/dt d/d$ (rcos$) is the process to find the answer... but what does this mean...?
 
Mathematics news on Phys.org
HAve you come across the chain rule? This states that \frac{df}{dt}=\frac{df}{dx}\frac{dx}{dt}. Thus, applying this to the case you mention, we obtain \frac{d}{dt}(rcos\theta)=\frac{d}{d\theta}(rcos\theta)\frac{d\theta}{dt}
 
The chain rule has been applied in arriving at the result.
http://mathworld.wolfram.com/ChainRule.html

\frac{df}{dt} = \frac{df}{d\theta}\frac{d\theta}{dt}, where f denotes the given function.

Edit: Since Cristo posted while I was playing with the typeset, I'm using theta instead of the more obvious x. :biggrin: Apparently, the '$' symbol messes up Latex.
 
Last edited:
If \theta is a function of time but r does not, then it is true that frac{df}{dt}= \frac{df}{d\theta}\frac{d\theta}{dt}.

If both f depends on both r and \theta and both r and \theta depend upon time,
\frac{df}{dt}= \frac{\partial f}{\partial r}\frac{dr}{dt}+ \frac{\partial f}{\partial \theta}\frac{d\theta}{dt}
 
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...
Seemingly by some mathematical coincidence, a hexagon of sides 2,2,7,7, 11, and 11 can be inscribed in a circle of radius 7. The other day I saw a math problem on line, which they said came from a Polish Olympiad, where you compute the length x of the 3rd side which is the same as the radius, so that the sides of length 2,x, and 11 are inscribed on the arc of a semi-circle. The law of cosines applied twice gives the answer for x of exactly 7, but the arithmetic is so complex that the...
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...

Similar threads

Back
Top