Differentiation anomoly-in need of setting straight

  • Thread starter Thread starter DyslexicHobo
  • Start date Start date
  • Tags Tags
    Differentiation
AI Thread Summary
The discussion revolves around a calculus problem involving implicit differentiation of the equation x + y = xy. The user initially attempted to simplify the equation to y = x/(x-1) but found discrepancies in the derivative answers. After further analysis, it was clarified that the answers derived from implicit differentiation were equivalent, differing only by a factor of -1. The user realized that both methods yield the same result when properly substituted, leading to a resolution of their confusion. Overall, the thread emphasizes the importance of careful differentiation and recognizing equivalent expressions.
DyslexicHobo
Messages
249
Reaction score
0
Differentiation anomoly--in need of setting straight!

I was studying for the AP calculus exam when I came across this question, which seems to have multiple answers. I cannot seem to find what is wrong with it (nor can my calc teacher).

Find dy/dx if x + y = x * y

I went about this problem the "easy way out". Instead of implicitly differentiating, I figured I could do some algebra to simplify it to y = x / (x-1). I saw the answers, and only one of them did not have a "y" in the answer, so I picked that one. It was wrong.

When solved implicitly, a different answer is found: (y-1)/(1-x). This is STILL different than what our answer key has, which is (1-y)/(x-1).

Can someone please help resolve this? Thanks!
 
Mathematics news on Phys.org
What ever other problems you're having:

When solved implicitly, a different answer is found: (y-1)/(1-x). This is STILL different than what our answer key has, which is (1-y)/(x-1).

contains a mistake on your part. The two answers written there are the same.
 
If you differentiate y=\frac{x}{x-1}, you get \frac{dy}{dx}=\frac{(x-1)-x}{(x-1)^2}.

Divide by \frac{x-1}{x-1}: \frac{dy}{dx}=\frac{1-\frac{x}{x-1}}{x-1}

Substitute y=\frac{x}{x-1}: \frac{dy}{dx}=\frac{1-y}{x-1}
 
When solved implicitly, a different answer is found: (y-1)/(1-x). This is STILL different than what our answer key has, which is (1-y)/(x-1).

No... it's just negative on the top and bottom. Multiply your answer by 1 = -1/-1 and see what you get
 
DyslexicHobo said:
I went about this problem the "easy way out". Instead of implicitly differentiating...

Isn't implicit differentiation "the easy way"?

1 + dy/dx = y + x dy/dx

1-y = (x-1)dy/dx

dy/dx = (1-y)/(x-1)
 
AlephZero said:
Isn't implicit differentiation "the easy way"?

1 + dy/dx = y + x dy/dx

1-y = (x-1)dy/dx

dy/dx = (1-y)/(x-1)

What I meant is that, because I could see that it simplified to y = *stuff with no y*, I figured that dy/dx MUST not have a y in it. There was only one choice without one, so I chose that. It was the easy way out because I did not do any differentiating at all.

Also, I figured out my problem. Both answers were the same, but had a "y", and the other did not. When a substitution was made for "y", the answers were identical.

And yeah... I can't believe I didn't notice that the answer simply divided by a factor of (-1). Wow I feel dumb! :-P


All here is well, thank you for the help.
 
Insights auto threads is broken atm, so I'm manually creating these for new Insight articles. In Dirac’s Principles of Quantum Mechanics published in 1930 he introduced a “convenient notation” he referred to as a “delta function” which he treated as a continuum analog to the discrete Kronecker delta. The Kronecker delta is simply the indexed components of the identity operator in matrix algebra Source: https://www.physicsforums.com/insights/what-exactly-is-diracs-delta-function/ by...
Fermat's Last Theorem has long been one of the most famous mathematical problems, and is now one of the most famous theorems. It simply states that the equation $$ a^n+b^n=c^n $$ has no solutions with positive integers if ##n>2.## It was named after Pierre de Fermat (1607-1665). The problem itself stems from the book Arithmetica by Diophantus of Alexandria. It gained popularity because Fermat noted in his copy "Cubum autem in duos cubos, aut quadratoquadratum in duos quadratoquadratos, et...
Thread 'Imaginary Pythagorus'
I posted this in the Lame Math thread, but it's got me thinking. Is there any validity to this? Or is it really just a mathematical trick? Naively, I see that i2 + plus 12 does equal zero2. But does this have a meaning? I know one can treat the imaginary number line as just another axis like the reals, but does that mean this does represent a triangle in the complex plane with a hypotenuse of length zero? Ibix offered a rendering of the diagram using what I assume is matrix* notation...

Similar threads

Back
Top