I'm confused about the consistency of partial derivatives

Click For Summary

Discussion Overview

The discussion revolves around the concept of partial derivatives, particularly in the context of functions where one variable is dependent on another. Participants explore the implications of treating variables as independent versus dependent and the resulting inconsistencies that arise in derivative calculations.

Discussion Character

  • Exploratory
  • Technical explanation
  • Debate/contested
  • Mathematical reasoning

Main Points Raised

  • One participant presents a function f(x,y) = xy with y as a function of x (y = x^2) and questions the meaning of changing x while holding y constant, leading to different expressions for the partial derivative.
  • Another participant argues that treating x and y as independent variables is essential for the validity of partial derivatives, stating that if y is a function of x, then it cannot remain constant while x changes.
  • A participant expresses confusion about the utility of partial derivatives if all variables are independent, questioning how they differ from total derivatives.
  • In response, another participant explains the application of the chain rule and the importance of partial derivatives in optimization and differential equations, emphasizing their role in various mathematical contexts.
  • A later reply reflects on the earlier confusion and acknowledges the usefulness of partial derivatives, particularly in non-Cartesian coordinates, while still questioning their necessity outside of total derivatives.

Areas of Agreement / Disagreement

Participants express differing views on the independence of variables and the implications for partial derivatives. There is no consensus on the utility of partial derivatives versus total derivatives, and the discussion remains unresolved regarding the foundational understanding of these concepts.

Contextual Notes

Participants highlight limitations in understanding how to apply partial derivatives when one variable is dependent on another, leading to potential inconsistencies in derivative values. The discussion reflects a need for clarity on definitions and assumptions in derivative calculations.

BucketOfFish
Messages
60
Reaction score
1
If you have a function

f(x,y)=xy

where y is a function of x, say

y=x^2

then the partial derivative of f with respect to x is

\frac{\partial f}{\partial x}=y

However, if you substitute in y and express f as

f(x)=x^3

then the partial derivative is

\frac{\partial f}{\partial x}=3x^2=3y

despite the fact that these expressions for f are equivalent! What does it mean to change one variable (x) while holding another variable constant (y) even though it is a function of the first variable? Does this mean that if you choose different ways of expressing a system, you will end up with different partial derivatives? What influence does this have on solving such systems?
 
Physics news on Phys.org
To have a function of x and y like this means that x and y are INDEPENDENT variables. One cannot be a function of the other and have partial derivatives like you did make sense.For example, when you calculate \frac{\partial f}{\partial x}, what you're doing is assuming every other variable is a constant, and using the limit definition of the derivative on the variable x. Essentially you're asking what happens to f(x,y) if x changes a little bit but y stays the same. But if y=x2, how can x vary but y remain constant? Obviously it's impossibleLet's look at an example from physics, we have for an ideal gas a relationship between pressure, temperature and volume PV=nRT. We can write P=P(V,T) = nRT/V.

Then \frac{ \partial P}{\partial T} = nR/V. What this means is that if the temperature increases by a little bit, without the volume changing at all, I expect P to increase by about (nR/V)\Delta T. On the other hand if I increase the temperature but the container is elastic so the volume increases as well and the pressure stays constant, the result I just stated is a lie! Well of course it is, because I didn't keep the volume constant as the temperature changed, which is what taking partial derivatives assumes
 
Thanks for the quick reply, Shredder. However, now I'm confused as to the utility of partial derivatives. If all variables are completely independent, then how is a partial derivative any different from a total derivative with respect to one variable?
 
What is your definition of total derivative?

One application is the chain rule. If we know that y=x2, then f(x,y) = f(x,y(x)) is a function of x and we can calculate its derivative:
\frac{df}{dx} = \frac{\partial f}{\partial x} \frac{dx}{dx} + \frac{\partial f}{\partial y} \frac{dy}{dx}

In the example above it's simply enough to just plug the formula for y in and calculate the derivative but there are times when you don't have a formula for f but want to prove a general result and need to use the chain rule to prove it.

The gradient of a function, which is a vector of every partial derivative of a function, tells you which direction to move in in order to increase/decrease the vector the fastest. This is critical for basic optimization algorithms. The gradient being 0 corresponds to being at a local extremum, and the Hessian, a matrix of second order partial derivatives, takes the place of the second derivative in deciding if you are at a local min or max.Functions of time and space - for example h(x,t) is the height of a waving piece of string x inches away from the end of the string at time t - satisfy differential equations using partial derivatives with respect to x and t.

The curl and divergence are other operators which take functions and give you new functions, and use partial derivatives to do so. These along with the gradient are essentially the tools required to describe classical electromagnetism using vector calculus.Asking why we want partial derivatives is like asking why we want to differentiate in the first place
 
Thanks for the response, but I feel like maybe I didn't express my question well. Let me try again, using the chain rule definition you provided.

\frac{df}{dx}=\frac{\partial f}{\partial x}+\frac{\partial f}{\partial y}\frac{\partial y}{\partial x}

Here, when y is not a function of x (the two are independent), the partial and total derivatives are equivalent.

\frac{df}{dx}=\frac{\partial f}{\partial x}

However, when y is a function of x, then the inconsistency I mentioned above comes into play. \frac{\partial f}{\partial x} does not have a well-defined value, but depends upon how f is expressed. (It does not make sense to me how you can vary x while holding y constant, if y is a function of x.) Thus, if the value of a partial derivative is either non-consistent, or else equivalent to a total derivative, then I don't see what the point of taking a partial derivative is, outside of defining a total derivative (and even then the matter seems fishy to me).

EDIT: Never mind, I thought about taking a gradient in non-Cartesian coordinates and realized that partial derivatives are in fact helpful. I still hold that they have no use outside of re-expressing a total derivative.
 
Last edited:

Similar threads

  • · Replies 6 ·
Replies
6
Views
3K
  • · Replies 1 ·
Replies
1
Views
3K
  • · Replies 16 ·
Replies
16
Views
3K
  • · Replies 3 ·
Replies
3
Views
4K
  • · Replies 2 ·
Replies
2
Views
3K
  • · Replies 4 ·
Replies
4
Views
3K
  • · Replies 9 ·
Replies
9
Views
2K
  • · Replies 3 ·
Replies
3
Views
2K
  • · Replies 1 ·
Replies
1
Views
3K
  • · Replies 3 ·
Replies
3
Views
4K