Taylor Expansion to Understanding the Chain Rule

AI Thread Summary
The discussion centers on the application of the chain rule in the context of derivatives involving multivariable functions. Participants clarify that while F(t) is expressed as a function of t, it is not explicitly defined in terms of t, which complicates the differentiation process. They emphasize the importance of recognizing which variables are explicitly stated when applying the chain rule. A specific example involving F(t) = xy^2 illustrates how to differentiate using both explicit and implicit forms, leading to the same result. Additionally, there is a critique regarding a dimensional analysis error in the original formula presented in the linked PDF, highlighting a misunderstanding of the relationship between distance and time.
TimeRip496
Messages
249
Reaction score
5
upload_2015-12-20_16-36-58.png
I don't understand this as isn't according to chain rule,
upload_2015-12-20_16-38-25.png
.
So where is the
upload_2015-12-20_16-38-56.png
in the above derivative of F(t)?
Source: http://www.math.ubc.ca/~feldman/m226/taylor2d.pdf
 
Mathematics news on Phys.org
##F(t) = f(x(t),y(t))##, so despite written to be a function of ##t##, the functional form of ##F(t)## is not written explicitly as a function of ##t##.
 
blue_leaf77 said:
##F(t) = f(x(t),y(t))##, so despite written to be a function of ##t##, the functional form of ##F(t)## is not written explicitly as a function of ##t##.
Why is it not a function of t? I am still new to this so do you have something i can read on about this?
Besides thanks for your response!
 
TimeRip496 said:
Why is it not a function of t?
It's not an explicit function of ##t##. When you want to do chain rule, you have to pay attention on which variables are written explicitly, despite whether or not these variables are functions of yet another variable. For example take ##F(t) = xy^2## where ##x = \sqrt{t}## and ##y=t-2##. If you want to calculate ##dF/dt##, you can either first express ##x## and ##y## in terms of ##t## and then differentiate w.r.t. ##t## or let ##F## be expressed in ##x## and ##y## then use the chain rule
$$
\frac{dF}{dt} = \frac{\partial F}{\partial x} \frac{dx}{dt} + \frac{\partial F}{\partial y} \frac{dy}{dt} .
$$
Both answers should be identical.
TimeRip496 said:
do you have something i can read on about this?
I guess this problem should belong to multivariate calculus.
 
  • Like
Likes TimeRip496
blue_leaf77 said:
It's not an explicit function of ##t##. When you want to do chain rule, you have to pay attention on which variables are written explicitly, despite whether or not these variables are functions of yet another variable. For example take ##F(t) = xy^2## where ##x = \sqrt{t}## and ##y=t-2##. If you want to calculate ##dF/dt##, you can either first express ##x## and ##y## in terms of ##t## and then differentiate w.r.t. ##t## or let ##F## be expressed in ##x## and ##y## then use the chain rule
$$
\frac{dF}{dt} = \frac{\partial F}{\partial x} \frac{dx}{dt} + \frac{\partial F}{\partial y} \frac{dy}{dt} .
$$
Both answers should be identical.

I guess this problem should belong to multivariate calculus.
Thanks a lot! I now understand.
 
I do not agree with the formula shown in the OP (dimensional analysis again). The picture states that \frac{d}{dt}x(t) = \Delta x which is obviously wrong. If x is distance and t is time, it tries to assert that velocity equals a (short) distance. The correct statement is \frac{d}{dt}x(t) \cdot \Delta t= \Delta x.
I can agree with the second line, but the third line is pure nonsense.
 
Svein said:
I do not agree with the formula shown in the OP (dimensional analysis again). The picture states that \frac{d}{dt}x(t) = \Delta x which is obviously wrong. If x is distance and t is time, it tries to assert that velocity equals a (short) distance. The correct statement is \frac{d}{dt}x(t) \cdot \Delta t= \Delta x.
I can agree with the second line, but the third line is pure nonsense.
In the linked pdf file, the author for some reason sets ##\Delta t = 1##.
 

Similar threads

Back
Top