Math Is Fun Forum
  Discussion about math, puzzles, games and fun.   Useful symbols: √ ∞ ≠ ≤ ≥ ≈ ⇒ ∈ Δ θ ∴ ∑ ∫ π -




Not registered yet?

#1 2006-03-03 17:37:52



Differentiation conundrum

I found this browsing the net. Any comments?

The derivative of x, with respect to x, is 2x.  However, suppose we write x as the sum of x x's, and then take the derivative:

Let f(x) = x + x + ... + x  (x times)

Then f'(x) = d/dx[x + x + ... + x]  (x times)
  = d/dx[x] + d/dx[x] + ... + d/dx[x]  (x times)
  = 1 + 1 + ... + 1  (x times)
  = x

This argument appears to show that the derivative of x, with respect to x, is actually x.  Where is the fallacy?

Character is who you are when no one is looking.

#2 2006-03-04 03:06:24

Full Member


Re: Differentiation conundrum

I don't know...the only thing I can think is that
x+x+x+.....+x  (x times) is only defined for x in Z+

So that is isn't continuous anywhere or differentiable, really...

The greatest challenge to any thinker is stating the problem in a way that will allow a solution.
                                                             -Bertrand Russell

#3 2006-03-04 03:31:32

John E. Franklin
Star Member


Re: Differentiation conundrum

Also the equation cannot be written down without ellipsis (...) in it.  Or you could write a summation.
But the number of terms changes with x, so the equation keeps changing, plus for negative x or fractional x's,
how many terms are there?

igloo myrtilles fourmis

#4 2006-03-04 05:03:02



Re: Differentiation conundrum

The fallacy is that you're treating the (x times) bit as a constant.

What you're actually doing there is differentiating kx to get k.

Why did the vector cross the road?
It wanted to be normal.

Board footer

Powered by FluxBB