Graphical meaning of tangent in optimization problem

nigels
Messages
36
Reaction score
0
In a trivial optimization problem, when seeking the value of x2 that minimizes y(x2)/(x2-x1), the solution is graphically given by the tangent line shown in the figure.

I'm having a lot of difficulty understanding why this is true, i.e., the logical steps behind the equivalence supporting the solution, either via calculus, algebraic, or geometric reasoning.
oft.png
 
Mathematics news on Phys.org
Are you sure that you have given all information? The curve looks suspiciously like y = x2.
 
@Svein: Sorry, x1 and x2 mean x_1 and x_2.
 
nigels said:
seeking the value of x2 that minimizes y(x2)/(x2-x1)
If we have no information on y(x) or on x1, it is impossible to answer. If we assume y = x2, it is at least possible: Minimize x2/(x-x1). Assuming that it exists, use the rule for deriving a fraction and see if it can be equal to 0.
 
I think you need this
 
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...
I'm interested to know whether the equation $$1 = 2 - \frac{1}{2 - \frac{1}{2 - \cdots}}$$ is true or not. It can be shown easily that if the continued fraction converges, it cannot converge to anything else than 1. It seems that if the continued fraction converges, the convergence is very slow. The apparent slowness of the convergence makes it difficult to estimate the presence of true convergence numerically. At the moment I don't know whether this converges or not.
Back
Top