This is the
talk page for discussing improvements to the
Derivative article. This is not a forum for general discussion of the article's subject. |
Article policies
|
Archives: 1, 2, 3Auto-archiving period: 730 days |
Derivative has been listed as one of the Mathematics good articles under the good article criteria. If you can improve it further, please do so. If it no longer meets these criteria, you can reassess it. | |||||||||||||||||||
|
This
level-4 vital article is rated GA-class on Wikipedia's
content assessment scale. It is of interest to multiple WikiProjects. | |||||||||||
|
This
edit request has been answered. Set the |answered= or |ans= parameter to no to reactivate your request. |
After the definition is given, indications on how to read are given. They include
"dy by dx at a", or "dy over dx at a"
should it be
"df by dx at a", or "df over dx at a"
since "y" is not use in the section ? Padelsart ( talk) 13:02, 1 February 2023 (UTC)
t
c
18:01, 1 February 2023 (UTC)I think the formula from Stegun ( https://personal.math.ubc.ca/~cbm/aands/abramowitz_and_stegun.pdf, page 824) should be added here: which contains the stirling numbers of the first kind and the forward difference operator to compute nth derivatives as series. Thoughts? — Preceding unsigned comment added by Onlineuser577215 ( talk • contribs) 19:35, 21 September 2023 (UTC)
This
edit request has been answered. Set the |answered= or |ans= parameter to no to reactivate your request. |
Researchrush ( talk) 23:22, 28 September 2023 (UTC)
I would like to add a brief bit about how Issac Newton called the derivative "the flowing quantity" and the notation he used.
After my reversion of the change of the heading
§ Euler's notation, I received the Could you please provide any evidence on the edited page that Euler used or popularized the D-notation for derivative, or that it is a "common name" (among who?) Otherwise, could you please restore my edit? Alexey Muranov (talk) 12:07, 2 October 2023 (UTC)
.
I am unable to provide to decide which is the most common name among "Arbogast's notation", "Euler's notation", and "D-notation", but it is certainly not "Arbogast's notation". This justifies my revert. However, there are so many things that are named after Euler's, that "Euler's notation" would need, at least, to be disambiguated. So, I'll change the heading to "D-notation", with a template {{
anchor|Euler's notation}}
and a note on the attribution.
D.Lazard (
talk) 14:05, 2 October 2023 (UTC)
The following discussion is closed. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page. No further edits should be made to this discussion.
Significant portions, including whole sections and subsections, of this 2007 listing are missing inline citations; the article thus does not meet GA criterion 2b). If someone has access to the books of the biblography section and the requisite knowledge, this is just a matter of finding pages, to my inexpert mind. ~~ AirshipJungleman29 ( talk) 00:36, 14 December 2023 (UTC)
@ AirshipJungleman29, @ Jacobolus: the discussion of improvement may be found in many places: see at my talk and the talk page of the article Derivative. In my talk page, me and XOR'easter discussed the improvement in the section of definition. Dedhert.Jr ( talk) 03:17, 18 December 2023 (UTC)
Some questions from me regarding the improvement of this article:
The Total derivative, total differential and Jacobian matrix section is awfully wordy and detailed for an article that's supposed to be about the concept of the derivative in general. It's a bit odd that we have 10 paragraphs of text that take up about 2 screens and invoke mappings between tangent bundles, but we don't have anything on maxima and minima of single-variable functions. And within that section, there's less emphasis comparatively speaking on Jacobians than I would have expected given how much I've seen these concepts covered in courses at different stages. XOR'easter ( talk) 03:43, 16 December 2023 (UTC)
The following discussion is closed. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page. No further edits should be made to this discussion.
I start when I could plot something in 3D (3- Dimensional). As I could do that, I apply .dx at the end for what I had found as per mathematics. On the other side it is a value we can calculate for Δy (change in y - [delta y]) instead of a rigid y. It is nothing but a change in y - Δy - f'(x).
Δy = integral_value . dx
Δy = NPr . dx
Further I am going to find dy/dx that's the first order of derivative. Over that everything else continues like finding continuity, discontinuity, finding convergence, divergence, whether the value converges or diverges.
dy/dx = <<what's been integrated divided by dx>>
As per me, I go with dy/dx = 1 = NP0
When I give a chance like NP1, it's a flaw, it never going to end. as the result is n, as per me it is just not n rather Nan-1, so the integrity collapses by muting within.
Let's have a great earth ever with our sun.— BramStoker's t@lk 19:42, 22 December 2023 (UTC)
During GAR, I removed the hidden online sources while improving the article.
All of these sources here are in the format CS2. Dedhert.Jr ( talk) 04:48, 31 December 2023 (UTC)
So at the end, you find the value which is the area of triangle multiplied by 2, not the surface area of triangle.
Matrix(A) . Transpose Matrix (A-1) = 1. It is the agreed one as everyone knows of it. And the matrix concepts falls on the linear algebra & part of the mathematics
I have checked in the following link, that the slope of the line can be calculated like this as mentioned in the page,- https://www.khanacademy.org/math/cc-eighth-grade-math/cc-8th-linear-equations-functions/8th-slope/a/slope-formula
I had tried a little permutation of the calculation myself, concluding putting it into a two dimensional matrix.
Slope => y2 - y1 / x2 - x1 => 7 - 4 / 7 - 1 => 3 / 6 => 1 / 2
Slope => (x1 x y2) - (x2 x y1) => (1 x 7) - (7 x 4) => 7 - 28 => - 21 => 21
At the end I am missing my mathematics that how value been profound. Number 2 is important in the mathematics also in computer field act as binary base system. Not only that, however I am not able to recall, 2 is an important number in vectors, stating the surface is 2 even if the side values are just denoted by value which is equals to 1 and it is a vector. Even √2 is important. 45° is important as it gives bijection between x and y.
And as you found a value of delta / 2 is equals to surface of the triangle value, if the z-axis is intact and the field is just 2D, and as I somehow recalls, number 2 plays vital role in vectors, I feel I can connect 21 with 1/2.
I couldn't relate 1/2 with 21 by mathematics, and as however in all higher dimensional matrix also, A.AT = 1. So I give all my chances to the serieses like harmonic series and the other ones. Other than that slope is always profound by derivative, a division of mathematics. And in vector 2 is important. And in matrix A.AT = 1
Let's step into 3D not by 2D any more.
— BilkTheHulk Talk - "Only dead fish go with the flow." 20:25, 17 January 2024 (UTC)
@ D.Lazard: Edit Special:PermanentLink/1201066147 changes constants back to all real numbers. The reversion was appropriate because it was in the context of real functions of real variables. However, I believe that it would be appropriate to have a brief acknowledgement that the chain rule is more generally applicable. I'm not sure whether it would be better inline or as a footnote. -- Shmuel (Seymour J.) Metz Username:Chatul ( talk) 16:00, 31 January 2024 (UTC)
@
D.Lazard: With regard to edit
special:diff/, I wrote the term as used in calculus on the
Real line
, not the term as used on the
Real line
. Also, the article is not about the term as used in calculus on Euclidean spaces in general, but rather the special case of calculus on a one dimensional Euclidean space.
Given that, This is about real functions, not about the real line
does not explain the reason for the reversion. Would you accept {{
about|the term as used in the calculus of
real functions of a single real variable|derivatives on manifolds|covariant derivative|and|Lie derivative|generalizations|generalizations of the derivative|a less technical overview of the subject|differential calculus|other uses}}
? --
Shmuel (Seymour J.) Metz Username:Chatul (
talk) 17:34, 1 February 2024 (UTC)
This is the
talk page for discussing improvements to the
Derivative article. This is not a forum for general discussion of the article's subject. |
Article policies
|
Archives: 1, 2, 3Auto-archiving period: 730 days |
Derivative has been listed as one of the Mathematics good articles under the good article criteria. If you can improve it further, please do so. If it no longer meets these criteria, you can reassess it. | |||||||||||||||||||
|
This
level-4 vital article is rated GA-class on Wikipedia's
content assessment scale. It is of interest to multiple WikiProjects. | |||||||||||
|
This
edit request has been answered. Set the |answered= or |ans= parameter to no to reactivate your request. |
After the definition is given, indications on how to read are given. They include
"dy by dx at a", or "dy over dx at a"
should it be
"df by dx at a", or "df over dx at a"
since "y" is not use in the section ? Padelsart ( talk) 13:02, 1 February 2023 (UTC)
t
c
18:01, 1 February 2023 (UTC)I think the formula from Stegun ( https://personal.math.ubc.ca/~cbm/aands/abramowitz_and_stegun.pdf, page 824) should be added here: which contains the stirling numbers of the first kind and the forward difference operator to compute nth derivatives as series. Thoughts? — Preceding unsigned comment added by Onlineuser577215 ( talk • contribs) 19:35, 21 September 2023 (UTC)
This
edit request has been answered. Set the |answered= or |ans= parameter to no to reactivate your request. |
Researchrush ( talk) 23:22, 28 September 2023 (UTC)
I would like to add a brief bit about how Issac Newton called the derivative "the flowing quantity" and the notation he used.
After my reversion of the change of the heading
§ Euler's notation, I received the Could you please provide any evidence on the edited page that Euler used or popularized the D-notation for derivative, or that it is a "common name" (among who?) Otherwise, could you please restore my edit? Alexey Muranov (talk) 12:07, 2 October 2023 (UTC)
.
I am unable to provide to decide which is the most common name among "Arbogast's notation", "Euler's notation", and "D-notation", but it is certainly not "Arbogast's notation". This justifies my revert. However, there are so many things that are named after Euler's, that "Euler's notation" would need, at least, to be disambiguated. So, I'll change the heading to "D-notation", with a template {{
anchor|Euler's notation}}
and a note on the attribution.
D.Lazard (
talk) 14:05, 2 October 2023 (UTC)
The following discussion is closed. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page. No further edits should be made to this discussion.
Significant portions, including whole sections and subsections, of this 2007 listing are missing inline citations; the article thus does not meet GA criterion 2b). If someone has access to the books of the biblography section and the requisite knowledge, this is just a matter of finding pages, to my inexpert mind. ~~ AirshipJungleman29 ( talk) 00:36, 14 December 2023 (UTC)
@ AirshipJungleman29, @ Jacobolus: the discussion of improvement may be found in many places: see at my talk and the talk page of the article Derivative. In my talk page, me and XOR'easter discussed the improvement in the section of definition. Dedhert.Jr ( talk) 03:17, 18 December 2023 (UTC)
Some questions from me regarding the improvement of this article:
The Total derivative, total differential and Jacobian matrix section is awfully wordy and detailed for an article that's supposed to be about the concept of the derivative in general. It's a bit odd that we have 10 paragraphs of text that take up about 2 screens and invoke mappings between tangent bundles, but we don't have anything on maxima and minima of single-variable functions. And within that section, there's less emphasis comparatively speaking on Jacobians than I would have expected given how much I've seen these concepts covered in courses at different stages. XOR'easter ( talk) 03:43, 16 December 2023 (UTC)
The following discussion is closed. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page. No further edits should be made to this discussion.
I start when I could plot something in 3D (3- Dimensional). As I could do that, I apply .dx at the end for what I had found as per mathematics. On the other side it is a value we can calculate for Δy (change in y - [delta y]) instead of a rigid y. It is nothing but a change in y - Δy - f'(x).
Δy = integral_value . dx
Δy = NPr . dx
Further I am going to find dy/dx that's the first order of derivative. Over that everything else continues like finding continuity, discontinuity, finding convergence, divergence, whether the value converges or diverges.
dy/dx = <<what's been integrated divided by dx>>
As per me, I go with dy/dx = 1 = NP0
When I give a chance like NP1, it's a flaw, it never going to end. as the result is n, as per me it is just not n rather Nan-1, so the integrity collapses by muting within.
Let's have a great earth ever with our sun.— BramStoker's t@lk 19:42, 22 December 2023 (UTC)
During GAR, I removed the hidden online sources while improving the article.
All of these sources here are in the format CS2. Dedhert.Jr ( talk) 04:48, 31 December 2023 (UTC)
So at the end, you find the value which is the area of triangle multiplied by 2, not the surface area of triangle.
Matrix(A) . Transpose Matrix (A-1) = 1. It is the agreed one as everyone knows of it. And the matrix concepts falls on the linear algebra & part of the mathematics
I have checked in the following link, that the slope of the line can be calculated like this as mentioned in the page,- https://www.khanacademy.org/math/cc-eighth-grade-math/cc-8th-linear-equations-functions/8th-slope/a/slope-formula
I had tried a little permutation of the calculation myself, concluding putting it into a two dimensional matrix.
Slope => y2 - y1 / x2 - x1 => 7 - 4 / 7 - 1 => 3 / 6 => 1 / 2
Slope => (x1 x y2) - (x2 x y1) => (1 x 7) - (7 x 4) => 7 - 28 => - 21 => 21
At the end I am missing my mathematics that how value been profound. Number 2 is important in the mathematics also in computer field act as binary base system. Not only that, however I am not able to recall, 2 is an important number in vectors, stating the surface is 2 even if the side values are just denoted by value which is equals to 1 and it is a vector. Even √2 is important. 45° is important as it gives bijection between x and y.
And as you found a value of delta / 2 is equals to surface of the triangle value, if the z-axis is intact and the field is just 2D, and as I somehow recalls, number 2 plays vital role in vectors, I feel I can connect 21 with 1/2.
I couldn't relate 1/2 with 21 by mathematics, and as however in all higher dimensional matrix also, A.AT = 1. So I give all my chances to the serieses like harmonic series and the other ones. Other than that slope is always profound by derivative, a division of mathematics. And in vector 2 is important. And in matrix A.AT = 1
Let's step into 3D not by 2D any more.
— BilkTheHulk Talk - "Only dead fish go with the flow." 20:25, 17 January 2024 (UTC)
@ D.Lazard: Edit Special:PermanentLink/1201066147 changes constants back to all real numbers. The reversion was appropriate because it was in the context of real functions of real variables. However, I believe that it would be appropriate to have a brief acknowledgement that the chain rule is more generally applicable. I'm not sure whether it would be better inline or as a footnote. -- Shmuel (Seymour J.) Metz Username:Chatul ( talk) 16:00, 31 January 2024 (UTC)
@
D.Lazard: With regard to edit
special:diff/, I wrote the term as used in calculus on the
Real line
, not the term as used on the
Real line
. Also, the article is not about the term as used in calculus on Euclidean spaces in general, but rather the special case of calculus on a one dimensional Euclidean space.
Given that, This is about real functions, not about the real line
does not explain the reason for the reversion. Would you accept {{
about|the term as used in the calculus of
real functions of a single real variable|derivatives on manifolds|covariant derivative|and|Lie derivative|generalizations|generalizations of the derivative|a less technical overview of the subject|differential calculus|other uses}}
? --
Shmuel (Seymour J.) Metz Username:Chatul (
talk) 17:34, 1 February 2024 (UTC)