LGBADERIVATIVE: \[\huge e^{\theta} (\tan \theta - \theta)\] i have no clue..maybe product rule?
yeah, product rule
\[\huge e^\theta \tan \theta = e^\theta \theta\] then twice product rule?
that equal is a minus sign of course
no need to distribute
no?
oh i see
\[u=e^{\theta}\]\[v=(\tan\theta-\theta)\]
u = \(e^\theta\) v = \((\tan \theta - \theta)\)
yeah what i meant
ditto!
so it's \[e^\theta (\sec^2 \theta + 1) + e^\theta (\tan \theta -1)?\]
why the -1 in the second set of parentheses?
or the +1 in the first...?
oh it's supposed to be theta
and that +1 should be -1
\[e^\theta \tan \theta + e^\theta (\tan \theta - \theta)\]
is that better?
\[u=e^x\implies u'=e^x\]\[v=\tan x-x\implies v'=\sec^2x-1\]\[(uv)'=u'v+v'u=e^x(\tan x-x)+e^x(\sec^2x-1)\]
so im right right? since sec^2 - 1 = tan^2
oh darn another typo >.<
darn latex
oh yeah, lol
now I see what you did
It's ok I make those too @lgbasallote , Turing is just a living android so he doesn't make syntax errors :-3
so just to be clear \[e^\theta (\tan^2 \theta) + e^\theta (\tan \theta - \theta)?\]
agree @agentx5 darn androids
@agentx5 yeah right... I have everything copy pasted to erase my errors quickly is all ;)
yes @lgbasallote
:-D But as long as it's "first d second + second d first" you're good
thanks! :D
Oh here's one more for you @lgbasallote : Quotient rule (how I remember it)
Quotient rule: \[\frac{d}{dt}\frac{high}{low} = \frac{((low)d(high)-(high)d(low)}{(low)^2} \]
It kind of has a sing-song tone to it, makes it easy to remember
I like to derive the quotient rule, I almost never even use it use the product rule instead
Eeek! Yeah I try to avoid making things unnecessarily harder :-D But to each their own technique that works for them, and yours clearly works for you
let \[\frac uv=(uv^{-1})\]\[(uv^{-1})'=u'v^{-1}-v^{-2}v'u={u'v-v'u\over v^2}\]i.e. product rule+chain rule=quotient rule. but whatever is easiest for you is always best :)
Join our real-time social learning platform and learn together with your friends!