What is fx(0,1) in Partial Differentiation for f(x,y)=2e^(x^2y)?

Mitchtwitchita
Messages
187
Reaction score
0
f(x,y)=2e^(x^2y), then fx(0,1) = ?

fx = 4xye^(x^2y)
=4(0)(1)e^(0)(1)
=e^0
=1?

I'm told that I'm getting this question wrong but don't know how. Can anybody please help show me what I'm doing wrong on this one?
 
Mathematics news on Phys.org
You are doing partial differentiation with respect to x, so you can treat y as a constant.

It's just simply using the chain rule and (e^x)' = e^x.

If you do that correctly you should get up to 2 \cdot ( 2y \cdot x^{2y-1} ) \exp (x^{2y}).

The x term is a nice fat zero, giving the final result of 0.
 
Crap! I see now. Thanks Gib.
 
Mitchtwitchita said:
f(x,y)=2e^(x^2y), then fx(0,1) = ?

fx = 4xye^(x^2y)
=4(0)(1)e^(0)(1)
=e^0
=1?

I'm told that I'm getting this question wrong but don't know how. Can anybody please help show me what I'm doing wrong on this one?
Is that
2e^{x^{2y}}
as Gib Z assumed or
2e^{x^2y}
which is what I would assume?
If it is the latter then
f_x= 4xye^{x^2y}
as you have. Then f_x(0,1)= 4(0)(1)e^{(0)(1)}= 0, not 1, because of the "0" multiplying the exponential.
 
Damn i just realized that :( Looking at his working it looks like you're right Halls =] Sorry guys.
 
It was the latter. But I realized what I was doing wrong from Gib's reply. Thanks guys!
 
Insights auto threads is broken atm, so I'm manually creating these for new Insight articles. In Dirac’s Principles of Quantum Mechanics published in 1930 he introduced a “convenient notation” he referred to as a “delta function” which he treated as a continuum analog to the discrete Kronecker delta. The Kronecker delta is simply the indexed components of the identity operator in matrix algebra Source: https://www.physicsforums.com/insights/what-exactly-is-diracs-delta-function/ by...
Fermat's Last Theorem has long been one of the most famous mathematical problems, and is now one of the most famous theorems. It simply states that the equation $$ a^n+b^n=c^n $$ has no solutions with positive integers if ##n>2.## It was named after Pierre de Fermat (1607-1665). The problem itself stems from the book Arithmetica by Diophantus of Alexandria. It gained popularity because Fermat noted in his copy "Cubum autem in duos cubos, aut quadratoquadratum in duos quadratoquadratos, et...
I'm interested to know whether the equation $$1 = 2 - \frac{1}{2 - \frac{1}{2 - \cdots}}$$ is true or not. It can be shown easily that if the continued fraction converges, it cannot converge to anything else than 1. It seems that if the continued fraction converges, the convergence is very slow. The apparent slowness of the convergence makes it difficult to estimate the presence of true convergence numerically. At the moment I don't know whether this converges or not.

Similar threads

Replies
4
Views
1K
Replies
11
Views
3K
Replies
2
Views
1K
Replies
7
Views
2K
Back
Top