Understanding the Chain Rule Equation: Explained with Examples

  • Context: Undergrad 
  • Thread starter Thread starter AndrewGRQTF
  • Start date Start date
  • Tags Tags
    Chain Chain rule
Click For Summary

Discussion Overview

The discussion centers around the application of the chain rule in calculus, specifically in the context of differentiating the equation ##g(q,w) = f(q,-w)## with respect to the variable ##w##. Participants explore various interpretations and calculations related to the derivative, addressing potential misunderstandings and notation issues.

Discussion Character

  • Technical explanation
  • Debate/contested
  • Mathematical reasoning

Main Points Raised

  • Some participants assert that the derivative of ##g(q,w)## with respect to ##w## should be expressed as $$\frac{dg}{dw} = -\frac{df}{d(-w)}$$, while others challenge this by stating that $$\frac{dg}{dw} \ne \frac{d}{dw} f(q,-w)$$.
  • One participant suggests that if ##f=g##, then $$\frac{df}{dw} = \frac{dg}{dw}$$, indicating a potential misunderstanding of variable dependence.
  • Another participant emphasizes the importance of maintaining the function's argument in derivative calculations, suggesting that dropping variables can lead to confusion.
  • There are examples provided, such as ##g(w) = 2 \cdot w = f(-w)##, to illustrate the relationship between ##g## and ##f##, but the implications of these examples remain debated.
  • Some participants express uncertainty about the correct application of the chain rule, particularly regarding the treatment of the negative sign in ##-w## and its impact on the derivative.

Areas of Agreement / Disagreement

Participants do not reach a consensus on the correct interpretation of the derivative. Multiple competing views are presented, with some asserting equality and others claiming inequality in the derivatives.

Contextual Notes

There are indications of confusion stemming from notation and the treatment of function arguments. The discussion highlights the need for clarity in expressing derivatives, particularly when involving composite functions.

AndrewGRQTF
Messages
27
Reaction score
2
If we have an equation ##g (q,w) =f(q,-w)## and we want to find the derivative of that equation with respect to w, we would normally do $$\frac {dg}{dw} = \frac {d}{dw} f(q,-w) = \frac {df}{d(-w)} \frac {d(-w)}{dw} = -\frac {df}{d(-w)} $$ but my friend is saying that $$\frac {dg}{dw}= -\frac {df}{dw}$$ how is the last equation true?
 
Physics news on Phys.org
AndrewGRQTF said:
If we have an equation ##g (q,w) =f(q,-w)## and we want to find the derivative of that equation with respect to w, we would normally do $$\frac {dg}{dw} = \frac {d}{dw} f(q,-w) = \frac {df}{d(-w)} \frac {d(-w)}{dw} = -\frac {df}{d(-w)} $$ but my friend is saying that $$\frac {dg}{dw}= -\frac {df}{dw}$$ how is the last equation true?
Where has the minus in ##d(-w)## gone to? We have ## \frac {dg}{dw} =-\frac {df}{d(-w)}= \frac {df}{dw}\,.##

Make a simple example: ##g(w)=2\cdot w = f(-w) = (-2)\cdot (-w)\,.##
 
##\frac {dg}{dw} \ne \frac {d}{dw} f(q,-w)## - write them out using the definition of derivative

friend is right
 
BvU said:
##\frac {dg}{dw} \ne \frac {d}{dw} f(q,-w)## - write them out using the definition of derivative

friend is right

But how is ##\frac {dg}{dw} \ne \frac {d}{dw} f(q,-w)##? It is given that ##g(q,w) = f(q,-w)## so we just take the derivative of both sides?

Writing out the derivative we have $$\frac{g(q,w+\Delta w) - g(q,w)}{\Delta w} = \frac{f(q,-(w+\Delta w)) - f(q,w)}{\Delta w}$$ as ##\Delta w \to 0##
 
Last edited:
AndrewGRQTF said:
But how is ##\frac {dg}{dw} \ne \frac {d}{dw} f(q,-w)##?
It is not unequal! If ##f=g## then ##\dfrac{df}{dw}=\dfrac{dg}{dw}\,.##

First we write ##f(q,-w)=f(q,h(w))## with ##h(w)=-w\,##. Then calculate again ##\dfrac{df}{dw}\,##.
Your friend set ##dw=d(h(w))=d(-w)## which is obviously wrong.

The confusion is due to bad notation, i.e. dropping the variables of the functions. Write it with ##h(.)## and do not drop them anywhere.
 
Last edited:
fresh_42 said:
It is not unequal! If ##f=g## then ##\dfrac{df}{dw}=\dfrac{dg}{dw}\,.##

First we write ##f(q,-w)=f(q,h(w))## with ##h(w)=-w\,##. Then calculate again ##\dfrac{df}{dw}\,##.
Your friend set ##dw=d(h(w))=d(-w)## which is obviously wrong.

The confusion is due to bad notation, i.e. dropping the variables of the functions. Write it with ##h(.)## and do not drop them anywhere.

Ok, thanks for your replies. Why is BvU saying what he's saying?
 
BvU said:
##\frac {dg}{dw} \ne \frac {d}{dw} f(q,-w)## - write them out using the definition of derivative

friend is right

How is my friend right?
 
fresh_42 said:
Make a simple example: ##g(w)=2\cdot w = f(-w) = (-2)\cdot (-w)\,.##

I'm having a bad night. My simple example:
$$g(w) = w = f(-w)$$ so ##g(1) = 1## and ## g(-1) =-1## and I was looking at ##f'## and ##g'## -- WRONG ! o:) o:)
 
AndrewGRQTF said:
After I do that and get $$\frac{df}{dw} = \frac{df}{dh} \frac{dh}{dw} = -\frac{df}{dh}$$ what do I do, why did you rewrite it that way?
I rewrote it, because the minus sign at ##w## is the cause of evil here. By writing it as what it is, namely a function itself whose derivative affects the result, I minimize the chance of mumbo-jumbo and brooming it somewhere under the carpet. The situation is (forget the ##q##, esp. as nobody used partial derivatives here!):
##g(w) = f(-w)=f(h(w))## and ##d(-w) = d(h(w)) = -dw## hence $$\dfrac{dg}{dw}=\dfrac{df(h(w))}{dw}=-\dfrac{df(h(w))}{d(-w)}=-\dfrac{df(h)}{dh}=-\dfrac{df(w)}{dw}=\dfrac{df(-w)}{dw}$$
 
  • Like
Likes   Reactions: AndrewGRQTF
  • #10
fresh_42 said:
I rewrote it, because the minus sign at ##w## is the cause of evil here. By writing it as what it is, namely a function itself whose derivative affects the result, I minimize the chance of mumbo-jumbo and brooming it somewhere under the carpet. The situation is (forget the ##q##, esp. as nobody used partial derivatives here!):
##g(w) = f(-w)=f(h(w))## and ##d(-w) = d(h(w)) = -dw## hence $$\dfrac{dg}{dw}=\dfrac{df(h(w))}{dw}=-\dfrac{df(h(w))}{d(-w)}=-\dfrac{df(h)}{dh}=-\dfrac{df(w)}{dw}=\dfrac{df(-w)}{dw}$$

Thanks a lot. I learned something important: not to forget about the argument of a function
 
  • Like
Likes   Reactions: fresh_42
  • #11
AndrewGRQTF said:
If we have an equation ##g (q,w) =f(q,-w)## and we want to find the derivative of that equation with respect to w, we would normally do $$\frac {dg}{dw} = \frac {d}{dw} f(q,-w) = \frac {df}{d(-w)} \frac {d(-w)}{dw} = -\frac {df}{d(-w)} $$ but my friend is saying that $$\frac {dg}{dw}= -\frac {df}{dw}$$ how is the last equation true?
$$\frac{d}{dw} f(q,-w) = \frac{d}{d(-w)} f(q,-w) \cdot \frac{d(-w)}{dw} = - f'(q,-w),$$
where ##f'(q,x) = (d/dx) f(q,x),## so ##f'(q,-w) = \left. f'(q,x) \right|_{x=-w}##

Basically, you just need to apply the chain rule to ##f(q,h(w))##, with ##h(w) = -w.##
 

Similar threads

  • · Replies 11 ·
Replies
11
Views
2K
  • · Replies 1 ·
Replies
1
Views
1K
  • · Replies 9 ·
Replies
9
Views
3K
  • · Replies 6 ·
Replies
6
Views
4K
  • · Replies 6 ·
Replies
6
Views
4K
  • · Replies 3 ·
Replies
3
Views
2K
  • · Replies 2 ·
Replies
2
Views
1K
  • · Replies 1 ·
Replies
1
Views
2K
  • · Replies 16 ·
Replies
16
Views
2K
  • · Replies 18 ·
Replies
18
Views
4K