Teaching Differential Calculus as the Limit of Discrete Calculus

Click For Summary

Discussion Overview

The discussion revolves around the teaching of differential calculus, specifically the idea of introducing derivatives through a discrete calculus framework. Participants explore the potential benefits and drawbacks of using finite differences and generalized polynomials to derive traditional derivative formulas, as well as the appropriateness of this approach for different educational contexts.

Discussion Character

  • Exploratory
  • Debate/contested
  • Conceptual clarification
  • Homework-related

Main Points Raised

  • One participant proposes using finite differences and generalized polynomials to derive derivative formulas, suggesting it could provide a novel conceptual framework for students.
  • Another participant expresses concern that the proposed approach may be too complex for students new to calculus, noting that they were introduced to power series and derivatives in a different sequence.
  • A third participant argues that the complexity of the proposed method could hinder understanding, suggesting that traditional definitions and approaches are more accessible.
  • One participant mentions Donald Knuth's "finite calculus" as an alternative method for introducing discrete calculus concepts, emphasizing that it has a different educational goal.
  • Several participants reflect on their own experiences learning calculus, indicating that the introduction of derivatives typically begins with geometric interpretations and basic limit definitions.
  • There is a suggestion that while the proposed method may be too advanced for a conventional calculus course, it could be suitable for an honors series if structured appropriately.
  • References to umbral calculus and related mathematical concepts are made, indicating that some participants are familiar with advanced topics that could relate to the discussion.

Areas of Agreement / Disagreement

Participants express a range of opinions on the proposed teaching method, with no consensus reached. Some find the approach potentially useful, while others believe it may complicate understanding for students new to calculus.

Contextual Notes

Participants note that the complexity of the proposed method may depend on the students' prior knowledge and the structure of the calculus course. There are also references to specific mathematical concepts that may not be familiar to all students.

Who May Find This Useful

This discussion may be of interest to educators in mathematics, particularly those involved in curriculum development for calculus courses, as well as those exploring innovative teaching methods in higher education.

jambaugh
Science Advisor
Insights Author
Gold Member
Messages
2,376
Reaction score
348
I'm teaching Calc I. this semester and we're now covering the derivatives of power function and exponential functions as well as the basic rules, e.g. linearity and product rule. Some years back I ran across an exposition of umbral calculus in the appendix of a reference. I cannot help but wonder if it would be useful for my students to be shown the discrete versions of the basic differential formulas and then to take one big whopping limit of everything to derive the corresponding derivative formulas:

Specifically...

We define the finite difference and the difference quotient of a function for some fixed non-zero parameter h as...
\Delta f(x) = f(x+h)-f(x) For the identity function in particular: \Delta x = h
Then the difference quotient is:\frac{\Delta f(x)}{\Delta x} = \frac{f(x+h)-f(x)}{h}
We then define the "preternatural" (any ideas on a better name?) base \tilde{e} = (1+h)^{1/h}
and the n^{th}-degree polynomials (generalized powers):p_n(x,h) = x(x-h)(x-2h)\cdots (x-nh+h)
and for n<0 the rational functions: p_n(x) = \frac{1}{(x+h)(x+2h)\cdots (x-nh)}

The idea is to show the usual derivative formulas, but for the difference quotients:
\frac{\Delta \tilde{e}^x}{\Delta x} = \tilde{e}^x \quad \text{ and } \quad \frac{\Delta p_n(x)}{\Delta x} = n p_{n-1}(x) we also have a product rule:
\frac{\Delta [u\cdot v]}{\Delta x} = \frac{\Delta u}{\Delta x}\cdot v + u \frac{\Delta v}{\Delta x} + h\frac{\Delta u}{\Delta x}\frac{\Delta v}{\Delta x}

Then "in the limit as h\to 0:
\frac{\Delta}{\Delta x}\to \frac{d}{dx}, \quad p_n(x,h)\to x^n,\quad \tilde{e}^x \to e^x
And the power rule, product rule, and derivative of the exponential function all manifest.

I'd be interested in hearing from anyone if they think this would be conceptually useful approach, or a horrible idea, or if there were any suggestions. At the very least I thought it might be a good undergraduate special topics course.

There are, further extensions as we can express the perturbed versions of any other analytic functions using the generalized powers in their usual power series expansion, e.g.\widetilde{\sin}(x) = p_1(x)-\frac{p_3(x)}{3!} + \frac{p_5(x)}{5!} + \cdots; \quad \frac{\Delta \widetilde{\sin}(x)}\Delta{x} = \widetilde{\cos}(x)
Too much? Comments encouraged!
 
  • Like
Likes   Reactions: jbergman
Science news on Phys.org
How is "just learning derivatives" taught now?

Some of this might be too much. I'm trying to remember when I first learned Calculus. I have not seen this Generalized form for polynomials pn(x,h) before. I'm not sure that I could take that for granted - especially as a student new to Calculus.

The power series came later when I learned them - using derivatives to derive them.

Just some thoughts.
 
  • Like
Likes   Reactions: DaveE
I hated delta-epsilon proofs in early calculus for definitions of derivatives etc. As difficult as these concepts and proofs are, I think they are far more approachable than what you are proposing. For example, without the elemetary calculus, how do you motivate e = (1+h) to the (1+h) power? This is better left to a special projects course.
I see you as a interested and astute teacher, on how best to present material to students in novel ways. You are to be congratulated. However, in this case, I think this is best left to a higher math course.
 
  • Like
Likes   Reactions: scottdave
I don't think this is a good approach because dragging the h along longer makes the formulas more complicated.

If I wanted to introduce a discrete version of Calculus first, I would try what Donald Knuth calls "finite calculus" in his book "Concrete Mathematics" where he uses the simple difference operator \Delta f(x) = f(x+1) - f(x). He gets many interesting formulas but has a different goal. I'm not sure if this can really be made into an illuminating precursor to Calculus or if knowing Calculus is necessary to appreciate it.

In any case, Mathologer also has an interesting video on it which contains delightful analogies like 2^n corresponding to e^x:
 
scottdave said:
How is "just learning derivatives" taught now?

Some of this might be too much. I'm trying to remember when I first learned Calculus. I have not seen this Generalized form for polynomials pn(x,h) before. I'm not sure that I could take that for granted - especially as a student new to Calculus.

The power series came later when I learned them - using derivatives to derive them.

Just some thoughts.
"just learning derivatives" in my course is, first the geometric definition as slope of tangent line on the graph of the function, then we do the limit of the difference quotient as the "formal definition". Then we start running through various properties an functions, e.g. linearity, product rule, powers exponentials....

As to "this might be too much", yes I think so for a conventional Calc. I course. But I think for an honors calculus series it would be within the student's grasp if the three course sequence is constructed appropriately. In my ambitious moments I fiddle with the idea of writing a textbook.

As for the "generalized derivative", see umbral calculus, falling (and rising) factorials, and Pochammer symbol. In most expositions the h = \Delta x value is fixed at 1.
 

Similar threads

  • · Replies 3 ·
Replies
3
Views
1K
Replies
7
Views
3K
  • · Replies 4 ·
Replies
4
Views
2K
  • · Replies 6 ·
Replies
6
Views
2K
Replies
4
Views
2K
  • · Replies 1 ·
Replies
1
Views
3K
  • · Replies 7 ·
Replies
7
Views
2K
  • · Replies 22 ·
Replies
22
Views
2K
  • · Replies 1 ·
Replies
1
Views
3K
  • · Replies 2 ·
Replies
2
Views
3K