If I do something like:
dydx=D
dy=D×dx
People would often say that it is not rigorous to do so. But if we start from the definition of the derivative:
limh→0f(x+h)−f(x)h=D
And by using the properties of limits we can say:
limh→0f(x+h)−f(x)limh→0h=D
And then finally:
limh→0(f(x+h)−f(x))=D×(limh→0h)
Isn't this the same? Or am I missing something?
Answer
I can spot the following mistake in your attempt:
And by using the properties of limits we can say:
limh→0f(x+h)−f(x)limh→0h=D
You cannot actually do that, as smcc has said. You must note that limx→0f(x)g(x)=limx→0f(x)limx→0g(x)ifflimx→0g(x)≠0
So what you have said is not right.
Now coming to the actual question, if dx and dy can be treated as variables,
most of the mathematicians treat ddx as a mathematical operator (like +,−,∗,/) which acts on the variable y. So that way, you can clearly understand what is the variable and what is not.
However, if you are strict enough to observe from the "limit" viewpoint, then observe that dydx is nothing but limΔx→0ΔyΔx. Now ΔyΔx is a fraction with Δy and Δx in the numerator and denominator. So you can view them as variables now.
Looks a bit weird, I know, but it entirely depends on how you want to support your argument and from which point of view you want to make your claim.
No comments:
Post a Comment