Understanding the Chain Rule in Derivatives: An Analysis of MIT Lecture Video

Click For Summary

Discussion Overview

The discussion centers around the application of the chain rule in derivatives, particularly in the context of a lecture video from MIT. Participants explore the implications of substituting variables and how this affects the first and second derivatives, raising questions about the notation and the role of constants in differentiation.

Discussion Character

  • Technical explanation
  • Debate/contested
  • Mathematical reasoning

Main Points Raised

  • Some participants express confusion about the transition from the first derivative to the second derivative, specifically questioning why the second derivative includes a factor of (1/a²) when "a" may not be a variable in "u".
  • Others argue that applying the derivative operator twice leads to the inclusion of (1/a²) as a standard result in operator notation.
  • One participant suggests that their misunderstanding stems from viewing the derivative as a constant function rather than recognizing it as a linear operator.
  • A later reply attempts to clarify the relationship between the derivatives, showing how the first derivative leads to the second derivative through the chain rule, while still acknowledging the role of "a".
  • Some participants reiterate their confusion about the notation used, particularly regarding the expression for the second derivative and the meaning of terms like dx².

Areas of Agreement / Disagreement

Participants do not reach a consensus on the interpretation of the second derivative and the role of "a" in the differentiation process. Multiple competing views and interpretations remain present throughout the discussion.

Contextual Notes

There are limitations in the clarity of notation and assumptions regarding the nature of "a" and its relationship to "u". The discussion reflects varying levels of understanding of operator notation and the application of the chain rule.

imsmooth
Messages
154
Reaction score
13
While solving an equation, the lecturer was using substitution in this video:


x=au was subbed in for Psi at timestamp 39:27
d/dx = (1/a)(d/du). I get that.
But then the second derivative is stated as being
d2/dx2 = (1/a2)(d2/du2)

How is it (1/a2) if we do not know if there is an "a" in the function "u"?
 
Physics news on Phys.org
What do you mean? If you are fine with (d/dx) = (1/a)(d/du), how can you doubt (d/dx)^2 = (1/a^2)(d/du)^2?
 
It is not the result squared. It is the second derivative.
 
imsmooth said:
It is not the result squared. It is the second derivative.
Yes, which is exactly what I wrote. Taking the second derivative is equivalent to applying the derivative operator twice. This is standard operator notation.
 
I guess I'm missing it or just thinking of it wrong:

x = au
dx = a du
dx2 = adu2 (since "a" is constant)

So, why is it a2?
 
imsmooth said:
I guess I'm missing it or just thinking of it wrong:

x = au
dx = a du
dx2 = adu2 (since "a" is constant)

So, why is it a2?
This makes no sense whatsoever, it is not clear what you mean by ##dx^2##. In standard notation, this would be either the differential of ##x^2## or the differential ##dx## squared. Neither behaves as you imply.
 
My notation is off. What I was trying to ask is why is the second derivative of "x" not "a" times the second derivative of "u"? If "a" is not a variable of "u", where is the "a^2" coming from?
 
The second derivative of ##x## or with respect to ##x##? Your original question was the derivative with respect to ##x##.

The following might help: You agree that the first derivative of a function wrt ##x## follows the rule
$$\frac{df}{dx} = \frac{1}{a} \frac{df}{da}$$
if ##x = au## and ##a## is a constant. Now, the second derivative is just applying the first derivative twice and so
$$
\frac{d^2f}{dx^2} = \frac{d}{dx}\frac{df}{dx} = \frac{d}{dx} \frac{1}{a}\frac{df}{du} = \frac{1}{a} \frac{d}{dx}\frac{df}{du}.
$$
Now, see ##df/du## just as any function ##g##. Regardless of what the function ##g## is, we have agreed that the first derivative is given by ##dg/dx = (1/a) dg/du## and so
$$
\frac{1}{a} \frac{d}{dx}\frac{df}{du} = \frac{1}{a} \frac{dg}{dx} = \frac{1}{a^2}\frac{dg}{du} = \frac{1}{a^2} \frac{d}{du}\frac{df}{du} = \frac{1}{a^2} \frac{d^2f}{du^2}.
$$

Also consider the following example: Let ##f(x) = x^2##, then if ##x = au## we find that ##df/dx = 2x## and ##d^2f/dx^2 = 2##. We also find that ##d^2f/du^2 = d(x^2)/du^2 = d(a^2u^2)/du^2 = a^2d(u^2)/du^2 = 2a^2##. Clearly, the relation ##d^2f/dx^2 = (1/u^2) d^2f/du^2## is satisfied in this case.
 
imsmooth said:
x=au was subbed in for Psi at timestamp 39:27
d/dx = (1/a)(d/du). I get that.
But then the second derivative is stated as being
d2/dx2 = (1/a2)(d2/du2)

How is it (1/a2) if we do not know if there is an "a" in the function "u"?

The way I would look at it is simply:

##\frac{d}{du} = a \frac{d}{dx}##

And:

##\frac{d^2}{du^2} = \frac{d}{du} \frac{d}{du} = (a \frac{d}{dx})(a \frac{d}{dx}) = a^2 \frac{d^2}{dx^2} ##

In fact, you could replace the derivatives by any linear operators:

If ##U = aX## then ##U^2 = a^2 X^2##

For any linear operators ##U## and ##X##
 
  • #10
Thanks for all the help. My issue I guess is that I was looking at it as the derivative of a constant function instead of it being a linear operator.
 

Similar threads

  • · Replies 6 ·
Replies
6
Views
4K
  • · Replies 7 ·
Replies
7
Views
2K
  • · Replies 5 ·
Replies
5
Views
2K
  • · Replies 36 ·
2
Replies
36
Views
6K
  • · Replies 4 ·
Replies
4
Views
1K
  • · Replies 1 ·
Replies
1
Views
2K
Replies
2
Views
3K
  • · Replies 11 ·
Replies
11
Views
10K
  • · Replies 2 ·
Replies
2
Views
2K
  • · Replies 3 ·
Replies
3
Views
2K