I Differentiation is Exact or Approximation

AI Thread Summary
The discussion explores whether differentiation is exact or merely an approximation, particularly in the context of uniform circular motion. It highlights the confusion surrounding the relationship between angular displacement and linear displacement, questioning the accuracy of the equations derived from these concepts. The conversation emphasizes that differentiation, defined as a limit, provides an exact outcome without uncertainty. It contrasts differential quotients with differentials of differences, suggesting that while they can yield similar results, they are fundamentally different. Ultimately, the discussion concludes that while approximations can be useful, differentiation itself is an exact mathematical process.
Devil Moo
Messages
44
Reaction score
1
Is Differentiation exact or just an approximation?

I am wonder whether this question is meaningful or not. Slope is expressed as "it is approaching to a value as x is approaching 0" so it is inappropriate to ask such question. But when I deal with uniform circular motion, it is very confusing.

Suppose ##A## is constant for vector ##\mathbf A##. And the angle between ##\mathbf A(t+\Delta t)## and ##\mathbf A(t)## is ##\Delta \theta##.
##\begin{align}
\Delta \mathbf A & = \mathbf A (t + \Delta t) - \mathbf A(t) \nonumber \\
| \Delta \mathbf A | & = 2A \sin (\Delta \theta / 2) \nonumber
\end{align}##

if ##\Delta \theta \ll 1##, ##\sin (\Delta \theta / 2) \approx \Delta \theta / 2##
##\begin{align} | \Delta \mathbf A | & \approx 2A (\Delta \theta / 2 \nonumber \\
& =A \Delta \theta \nonumber \\
| \Delta \mathbf A / \Delta t | & \approx A (\Delta \theta / \Delta t) \nonumber
\end{align}##

if ##\Delta t \rightarrow 0##,
##| d \mathbf A / dt | = A (d \theta / dt)##

But isn't it ##| d \mathbf A / dt | = 2A (d \sin (\Delta \theta / 2) / dt)##?

Is ##v = r \omega## not accurate compared with ##v = 2r (d \sin (\Delta \theta / 2) / dt)##?
 
Last edited:
Mathematics news on Phys.org
Differentiation is exact: it is expressed as a limit and that makes for an outcome without uncertainty.

##| d \mathbf A / dt | = 2A (d \sin (\Delta \theta / 2) / dt)##
On the left you have a differential quotient, but on the right you have a differential of a difference.
With ##\theta/2 = \omega t/2## you do get the same differential ##\omega r##.
 
By chain rule,

##\begin{align}
\frac {d\sin(\theta/2)} {d(\theta /2)}\frac {d(\theta / 2)} {d\theta} & = \frac {1} {2} \cos\frac {\theta} {2} \frac {d\theta} {dt} \nonumber \\
|\frac {d\mathbf A} {dt} | & = A\cos\frac {\theta} {2} \frac {d\theta} {dt} \nonumber
\end{align}##

It seems they are not the same differential.

Also,

##| \frac {\Delta A} {\Delta t} | \approx A\frac {\Delta \theta} {\Delta t}##

when ##t \rightarrow 0##, why it will become equality?
 
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...
Back
Top