You are not logged in.
Pages: 1
Another quick question.
The question I've just completed reads:
I completed the proof and then got a little bit stuck on the second half of the question. What I was minded to do was square root both sides in order to obtain an expression in terms of plain old V and then use the chain rule. This turned out to be a bit problematic and, in the end, I had to resort to what I thought was a bit of a cheat, but it was the only way I could get the right answer. Instead, I did:
Solved
for x:
Found that
And solved for V: V = 36.
Question: Is this legitimate? More to the point, is it generally legitimate, cause I've got things like implicit differentiation in the back of my mind and something feels wrong about differentiating V² but I couldn't think how else to do it!
Offline
Bassaricyon neblina
Offline
Thanks Olinguito, that's the sort of thing I would have expected, but the exercise in question occurs in the book before implicit differentiation is introduced, which is why I was hesitant to go down that kind of road.
Perhaps the book was expecting you to cheat, or perhaps I've simply got lucky.
Either way, I appreciate it and I'm more or less happy!
Edit: Although, surely
Is not V but V²? So I should have
Last edited by Au101 (2015-02-18 07:56:32)
Offline
Yes, you're right, I forgot to take the square root for V.
Bassaricyon neblina
Offline
Pages: 1