The Student Room Group

Solve using quotient rule y=5x^3/(4x^2-3)^3

I have manage to differentiate the question but I’ve got completely confused when trying to simplify the answer.

I have factored out the common factor but I’ve got a little confused on the way as to what to do next

IMG_2971.jpeg
(edited 2 months ago)
Reply 1
Original post by KingRich
I have manage to differentiate the question but I’ve got completely confused when trying to simplify the answer.
I have factored out the common factor but I’ve got a little confused on the way as to what to do next

Can you post a pic of what youve done? It shouldnt be too bad if you factor out the common parts correctly.
Reply 2
Original post by mqb2766
Can you post a pic of what youve done? It shouldnt be too bad if you factor out the common parts correctly.

Sorry, i had started the message but got distracted and forgot click update
Reply 3
Original post by KingRich
Sorry, i had started the message but got distracted and forgot click update

You can cancel the (4x^2-3)^2 on the numerator with (part of) the denominator. But your last term (4x^2-3)-8x^2 on the penultimate line going to the last line isnt correct. Its subtraction, not multiplication.
(edited 2 months ago)
Reply 4
Original post by mqb2766
You can cancel the (4x^2-3)^2 on the numerator with (part of) the denominator. But your last term (4x^2-3)-8x^2 on the penultimate line going to the last line isnt correct. Its subtraction, not multiplication.

You mean like this?

IMG_2972.jpeg

I did that previously but leaving the other 4x²-3 didn’t seem right to me.
Reply 5
Original post by KingRich
You mean like this? IMG_2972.jpegI did that previously but leaving the other 4x²-3 didn’t seem right to me.

Yes, now simplify the [...] on the numerator.
(edited 2 months ago)
Reply 6
Original post by mqb2766
Yes, now simplify the [...] on the numerator.

Sorry, I took a break and started reading last night.

IMG_2978.jpeg

So, expand like so, and simply fly by extracting the common factor -8x² and multiplying by 15x²?

So, that would be -120x⁴(4x²-3)/(4x²-3)⁴ ?
Reply 7
Original post by KingRich
Sorry, I took a break and started reading last night.
IMG_2978.jpeg
So, expand like so, and simply fly by extracting the common factor -8x² and multiplying by 15x²?
So, that would be -120x⁴(4x²-3)/(4x²-3)⁴ ?

Youre subtracting 8x^2, not multiplying by -8x^2.
Reply 8
As a side note, obviously if the question says "use the quotient rule", you have no choice, but if you have something of the form ddxf(x)g(x)α\dfrac{d}{dx}\dfrac{f(x)}{g(x)^\alpha} (with α1\alpha \neq 1), it's generally easier to rewrite this as ddxf(x)g(x)α\dfrac{d}{dx}f(x)g(x)^{-\alpha} and use the product rule.

[they're not really *that* different, but you don't end up with as much to cancel at the simplification stage].
(edited 2 months ago)
Reply 9
Original post by DFranklin
As a side note, obviously if the question says "use the quotient rule", you have no choice, but if you have something of the form ddxf(x)g(x)α\dfrac{d}{dx}\dfrac{f(x)}{g(x)^\alpha} (with α1\alpha \neq 1), it's generally easier to rewrite this as ddxf(x)g(x)α\dfrac{d}{dx}f(x)g(x)^{-\alpha} and use the product rule.
[they're not really *that* different, but you don't end up with as much to cancel at the simplification stage].

I was going to post this at end as its a simple way of justifying why you must have a ^4 on the denominator (after cancelling) rather than a ^6. So even if you dont do it this way, it explains #4.
Reply 10
Original post by mqb2766
Youre subtracting 8x^2, not multiplying by -8x^2.

Oh, poop!! that must have been where I’ve been going wrong!!

Okay, so:

IMG_2979.jpeg

Late reply: partner wanted to go shopping for her birthday
Reply 11
Original post by DFranklin
As a side note, obviously if the question says "use the quotient rule", you have no choice, but if you have something of the form ddxf(x)g(x)α\dfrac{d}{dx}\dfrac{f(x)}{g(x)^\alpha} (with α1\alpha \neq 1), it's generally easier to rewrite this as ddxf(x)g(x)α\dfrac{d}{dx}f(x)g(x)^{-\alpha} and use the product rule.
[they're not really *that* different, but you don't end up with as much to cancel at the simplification stage].

Is this A-Level? I don’t believe I’ve yet covered this in my current course or from my A-Level.

Edit: I just realised what is happening here, you’re just multiplying the denominator with the numerator which explains the negative power and why chain rule would work here. Which I now see why the chain rule is the go to, over using quotient rule.

I’ve just covered differentiating exponentials and inverse trigs. That’s as much as I’ve done in this calculus unit from the course.

As you’re both here, could you help me understand what is the fundamental of calculus is? I’ve briefly learned that it’s what connects differentiation with integration but I don’t know the full concept. :smile:
(edited 2 months ago)
Reply 12
Original post by KingRich
Oh, poop!! that must have been where I’ve been going wrong!!
Okay, so: IMG_2979.jpegLate reply: partner wanted to go shopping for her birthday

Id have taken just the - out and left it factorised so
-15x^2(...)/(...)
but otherwise fine (apart from the denom being 4x^2 not 4x^3 - typo)
(edited 2 months ago)
Reply 13
Original post by mqb2766
Id have taken just the - out and left it factorised so
-15x^2(...)/(...)
but otherwise fine.

So, leave as it is but just take out the negative. Thank you. It’s annoying sometimes when I advance a lot and then recall so many formulas but forget how to do the simple maths that I learned way back.
Reply 14
Original post by KingRich
So, leave as it is but just take out the negative. Thank you. It’s annoying sometimes when I advance a lot and then recall so many formulas but forget how to do the simple maths that I learned way back.

note the edit about the denom typo.
Reply 15
Original post by mqb2766
note the edit about the denom typo.

Oh, yes. Indeed a typo.

Thank you for pointing that out.
Original post by KingRich
Edit: I just realised what is happening here, you’re just multiplying the denominator with the numerator which explains the negative power and why chain rule would work here. Which I now see why the chain rule is the go to, over using quotient rule.
That's not how I'd describe it.
Firstly, I'm just rewriting the division as a multiplication by the reciprocal. Which is a purely algebraic operation (basicaly GCSE level manipulation).
Secondly, in terms of differentiation rules, I'm using the product rule instead of the quotient rule. But both methods use the chain rule: explicitly, I'm using it to find ddxf(x)α\dfrac{d}{dx} f(x)^{-\alpha} and you are using it to find ddxf(x)α\dfrac{d}{dx} f(x)^\alpha.

[incidentally, this is why i added the caveat ("with α1\alpha \neq 1). In that case, I'm using the chain rule to find ddxf(x)1\dfrac{d}{dx} f(x)^{-1}, while with the quotient rule you just need to find ddxf(x)\dfrac{d}{dx} f(x) (and so you don't have an additional chain rule to apply)].




As you’re both here, could you help me understand what is the fundamental of calculus is? I’ve briefly learned that it’s what connects differentiation with integration but I don’t know the full concept. :smile:
The fundamental theorem of calculus is that ddxaxf(t)dt=f(x)\displaystyle \dfrac{d}{dx} \int_a^x f(t) \,dt = f(x) (for f continuous, although you don't really need to worry about that).

Or to put it in words, "you can find the integral of f(x) by finding a function g(x) with ddxg(x)=f(x)\dfrac{d}{dx} g(x) = f(x)". (*)

If this seems "odd", or tautological, it's because the first way we teach people about integration usually starts from (*), but that's not what integration "really" is.

Fundamentally, integration is about finding the area under a curve. That's how it's defined at university, and there's some fairly complex machinery involved in defining how we do this rigourously. So the fundamental theorem of calculus is saying "if we define g(t) to be the area under y = f(x) between x = a and x = t, then dgdt=f(t)\dfrac{dg}{dt} = f(t)".

And it's that result that lets us say "if want to find the area under y = f(x) between x = a and x = b, it's enough to find a function g(x) with dg/dx = f(x) and calculate g(b) - g(a)".

[to put it another way, it's the fundamental theorem of calculus that underpins pretty much everything you know about how to integrate functions.]
(edited 1 month ago)

Quick Reply