What is the concept of dx in calculus?

  • Context: Undergrad 
  • Thread starter Thread starter spaghetti3451
  • Start date Start date
  • Tags Tags
    Calculus Infinitesimal
Click For Summary

Discussion Overview

The discussion centers around the concept of dx in calculus, exploring its meaning and implications from both mathematical and physical perspectives. Participants examine the nature of dx as an infinitesimal change, its role in calculus, and the validity of various interpretations, including those from differential geometry and nonstandard analysis.

Discussion Character

  • Debate/contested
  • Conceptual clarification
  • Mathematical reasoning

Main Points Raised

  • Some participants assert that dx represents an infinitesimal change in x, as defined by sources like Wikipedia, while others challenge this interpretation, arguing that infinitesimals lack meaning in standard analysis.
  • A participant expresses concern that viewing dx as meaningless undermines the foundation of physical sciences.
  • Another participant suggests that while dx may lack meaning in a strict mathematical sense, the concepts of integrals and derivatives remain well-defined and useful in physics.
  • Some propose that differential geometry, particularly differential forms, offers a more meaningful framework for understanding dx.
  • There is a suggestion that reading "calculus on manifolds" could provide further insight into the meaning of dx.
  • One participant argues for a two-point approach to understanding dx as the difference between two nearby points, emphasizing the importance of neighborhoods in ensuring differentiability.
  • Another participant critiques the idea that defining concepts guarantees differentiability, stating that a function either is or isn't differentiable at a point.
  • Some participants discuss the relationship between dx and the approximation of derivatives, noting that dx need not be small but is often treated as such in practical applications.
  • There is mention of Zeno's paradox in relation to the concept of limits and infinitesimals, suggesting that while differentials approach zero, they do not equal zero.
  • A participant emphasizes that dx and dy have specific meanings tied to the definition of the derivative, acting as placeholders for infinitesimal changes.
  • Concerns are raised about the implications of using dx in mathematical expressions without clear definitions or contexts.

Areas of Agreement / Disagreement

Participants express a range of views on the meaning and utility of dx, with no consensus reached. Some agree on its role as an infinitesimal change, while others dispute this characterization, leading to a contested discussion with multiple competing interpretations.

Contextual Notes

Limitations in the discussion include varying definitions of dx, the dependence on different mathematical frameworks (such as standard analysis versus nonstandard analysis), and the unresolved nature of certain mathematical arguments regarding differentiability and the meaning of infinitesimals.

  • #31
Hurkyl said:
Infinitessimal has a precise definition -- usually it's something like:

x is infinitessimal if the size of x is smaller than 1/n for every positive integer n

The description you have doesn't really fit with how mathematicians use the term "infinitessimal". Among other things, in the real number system, there is only one infintiessimal, and it's called "zero".

Other number systems have infinitesimal objects that really aren't all that mysterious. Other algebraic structures capture the notion too -- such as the notions of "differential form" and "tangent vector".

In your definition, I think you want to include a condition that x is greater than zero. Otherwise -1 would be considered infinitesimal. The way the term is normally used, 0 is also not considered infinitesimal. Non-standard analysis http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Non-standard_analysis has infinitesimals that fit this definition. There is a very nice freshman calc book available online that does calculus using infinitesimals: http://www.math.wisc.edu/~keisler/calc.html
 
Last edited by a moderator:
Physics news on Phys.org
  • #32
bcrowell said:
In your definition, I think you want to include a condition that x is greater than zero.
"Size". In the case of elements an ordered field, that would mean absolute value. I suppose I should have been more explicit, though.

The way the term is normally used, 0 is also not considered infinitesimal.
Huh. I've only seen the opposite convention. e.g. Keisler's book:
Then the only real number that is infinitesimal is zero.​
It's good to know there are people who use the opposite convention.




At least, I only remember seeing the opposite convention. I can easily imagine having seen the other, but chalked it up to the tendency for people to (IMO) gratuitously exclude degenerate cases from definitions, and so didn't take it all that seriously.
 
  • #33
Hurkyl said:
Huh. I've only seen the opposite convention. e.g. Keisler's book:
Then the only real number that is infinitesimal is zero.​
It's good to know there are people who use the opposite convention.

Or maybe I was just wrong :-)
 
  • #34
Whoopes I made a typo

I previously said 0 > dx < 1

but i meant

0 < dx < 1

I blame it on the cat tibels
 

Similar threads

  • · Replies 24 ·
Replies
24
Views
6K
  • · Replies 5 ·
Replies
5
Views
3K
  • · Replies 31 ·
2
Replies
31
Views
4K
  • · Replies 0 ·
Replies
0
Views
3K
  • · Replies 22 ·
Replies
22
Views
4K
  • · Replies 9 ·
Replies
9
Views
2K
  • · Replies 26 ·
Replies
26
Views
3K
  • · Replies 11 ·
Replies
11
Views
2K
  • · Replies 0 ·
Replies
0
Views
3K
  • · Replies 3 ·
Replies
3
Views
3K