Partial derivitives chain rule proof

Click For Summary

Homework Help Overview

The discussion revolves around proving a relationship involving second partial derivatives of a function defined in terms of two variables, x and y, which are expressed as functions of two other variables, s and t. The participants are exploring the application of the chain rule in the context of partial derivatives.

Discussion Character

  • Exploratory, Mathematical reasoning, Assumption checking

Approaches and Questions Raised

  • Participants discuss whether the partial derivatives need to be fully expanded or if manipulation of the terms is sufficient for the proof. There is also a question about the correct formulation of the second partial derivative and how to approach its calculation.

Discussion Status

Some participants have provided steps for calculating the second partial derivatives, while others are questioning the correctness of the expressions used. There is an ongoing exploration of the implications of assumptions made about the function f and its derivatives.

Contextual Notes

There is a mention of potential confusion regarding the terms in the expressions, particularly whether certain terms should include a plus sign. Additionally, assumptions about the form of the function f are being debated, which may impact the overall proof.

ProPatto16
Messages
323
Reaction score
0

Homework Statement



If u=f(x,y) where x=escost and y=essint

show that d2u/dx2+d2u/dy2 = e-2s[d2u/ds2+d2u/dt2

The Attempt at a Solution



i have no idea!

question though, do the partial derivitives have to be solved and expanded then just show that one side equals the other or can it be proven by manipulating the terms as they are?

the only relevant chain rule is this one

du/ds=du/dx*dx/ds+du/dy*dy/ds and du/dt=du/dx*dx/dt+du/dy*dy/dt

this gives the first step of the partial derivitives to some of the question. how would i go about finding the second partial derivative?

any help would be great!
 
Physics news on Phys.org
You find the second partial derivative by doing it again!

For example, [itex]x= e^s cos(t)[/itex] and [itex]y= e^s sin(t)[/itex] so
[tex]\frac{\partial f}{\partial s}= \frac{\partial f}{\partial x}(e^s cos(t)+ \frac{\partial f}{\partial y}(e^s sin(t)[/tex]

Then
[tex]\frac{\partial^2 f}{\partial s^2}= \frac{\partial}{\partial s}\left(\frac{\partial f}{\partial x}(e^s cos(t)+ \frac{\partial f}{\partial y}(e^s sin(t)\right)[/tex]
[tex]= \frac{\partial}{\partial s}\left(\frac{\partial f}{\partial x}\right)(e^s cos(t))+[/tex][tex]\frac{\partial f}{\partial x}\left(\frac{\partial}{\partial s}\right)\left(\frac{\partial}{\partial s}\right)\left(e^s cos(t)\right)+[/tex][tex]\frac{\partial f}{\partial y}(e^s sin(t))+ \frac{\partial}{\partial s}\left(e^s sin(t)\right)[/tex]
[tex]= \frac{\partial^2 f}{\partial x^2}(e^s cos(t))^2+\frac{\partial f}{\partial x}(e^s cos(t)) \frac{\partial^2 f}{\partial x^2}(e^s sin(t))^2+ \frac{\partial f}{\partial x}(e^s sin(t))[/tex]
 
Last edited by a moderator:
in the last line... should there be a + in the middle there?
 
Last edited:
assuming there is meant to be a plus in there... and continuing on...

that last line simplifies to:

= d2f/dx2(e2scos2t+e2ssin2t) + df/dx(escost+essint)

= d2f/dx2[e2s(cos2t+sin2t)] + df/dx(escost+essint)

now i can see that cos2t+sin2t = 1 so first term becomes d2f/dx2[e2s]

then when you did it with d2f/dy2 you would get d2f/dy2[e2s] for the first term then a similar second second, then i can see how the proof would work out


but i can't get rid of the second terms df/dx(escost+essint) and the df/dy one ?
 
hold up...

f in terms of x and y would just be f=x+y right? without making the substitutions for the equations of x and y... therefore df/dx would be zero? then it all works out!
 

Similar threads

  • · Replies 28 ·
Replies
28
Views
3K
  • · Replies 2 ·
Replies
2
Views
3K
Replies
21
Views
2K
Replies
4
Views
1K
  • · Replies 4 ·
Replies
4
Views
2K
  • · Replies 1 ·
Replies
1
Views
2K
  • · Replies 10 ·
Replies
10
Views
2K
Replies
2
Views
2K
  • · Replies 13 ·
Replies
13
Views
2K
  • · Replies 1 ·
Replies
1
Views
2K