I saw a video of you 5 min ago and i was speechless. You are a king in educating people! Keep up the nice and good work. Never ever saw a teacher even close to your skill in teaching. I hope you will always have that much fun in what you do. Greatings from Germany!
I've forgotten all of these and god bless my mech engineering friend for trying to teach this to me, but my brain would just melt doing these. So i am always looking for refresher courses. These videos are really great for learning/re-learning the ideas
So I just watched this video and haven't found the one where you show the answer. But I tried to do the challenge chain rule! I think I got it correct i.imgur.com/cV82b7O.png
I've also seen this referred to as "function of a function", because one function is nested inside another, or in other words the output from the inner function forms the input to the outer function.
During that chain rule, are we actually cancelling the 'du' in the nominator and denominator? Or are we arranging that in the form of dy/dx*du/du and replacing du/du with 1? Whatever it is, we are left with 1, but I'm not sure if we're supposed to treat them as fractions and cancel them.
I see it as working them with alike terms and then rearrenging them in a way that the similar terms do not affect the rest of the equation. After all, the term "u" is introduced as another way of calling the original X's. You're working the same variables on different names.
@@elyssium_ Yes. They work in similar ways but technically, it's not cancelling out like fractions I guess. I'm also studying Calculus now, so don't have much idea regarding it. Posed this comment as a query rather than a claim.
Your process of rearranging dy/dx and du/du and cancellation of fractions are basically the same process. When I was taught this I did a 3 step process where I did my u substitution, differentiated it, and then isolated dx so I could just substitute dx for my value times du.
Oh, wow that Garry is kinda like me, but I'm younger. I mean I always do everything in my head, because it is so easy. But I had to learn to write stuff down to actually get good grades. The advice Mr. Woo gives his student is almost identical in form to what teachers have always been telling me. 😉
Hi, just something I wanted to know. Why is 75% of -4 = -3 Because logically speaking -3>-4 How can a number be 75% of a smaller number. Is it just convention?. Thanks.
4 years removed from calculus 1 and I've never thought about the chain rule in this way. Wow I really love your style of teaching
Love the way Eddie keeps his students engaged. Great explanation!
I saw a video of you 5 min ago and i was speechless. You are a king in educating people! Keep up the nice and good work. Never ever saw a teacher even close to your skill in teaching.
I hope you will always have that much fun in what you do. Greatings from Germany!
I've forgotten all of these and god bless my mech engineering friend for trying to teach this to me, but my brain would just melt doing these.
So i am always looking for refresher courses. These videos are really great for learning/re-learning the ideas
So I just watched this video and haven't found the one where you show the answer. But I tried to do the challenge chain rule! I think I got it correct
i.imgur.com/cV82b7O.png
The answer for the last question is -36(3x+2)^-4
Holy shit this is god level teaching
Still interesting in university 😅😇
I've also seen this referred to as "function of a function", because one function is nested inside another, or in other words the output from the inner function forms the input to the outer function.
The chain rule doesn't seem to be a function of a function because of an additional multiplication.
i alredy know all of this, but the way Eddie talks is more intuitive than the way i learned
I've never derived the chain rule with u-sub and the differential operators canceling. i love it
I just love how active he is! Good luck on your next videos!! :))
Great explanation! You have really clarified the differential notation for me.
Hello from Germany! ;)
You awesome!
During that chain rule, are we actually cancelling the 'du' in the nominator and denominator? Or are we arranging that in the form of dy/dx*du/du and replacing du/du with 1? Whatever it is, we are left with 1, but I'm not sure if we're supposed to treat them as fractions and cancel them.
I see it as working them with alike terms and then rearrenging them in a way that the similar terms do not affect the rest of the equation. After all, the term "u" is introduced as another way of calling the original X's. You're working the same variables on different names.
@@elyssium_ Yes. They work in similar ways but technically, it's not cancelling out like fractions I guess. I'm also studying Calculus now, so don't have much idea regarding it. Posed this comment as a query rather than a claim.
Your process of rearranging dy/dx and du/du and cancellation of fractions are basically the same process. When I was taught this I did a 3 step process where I did my u substitution, differentiated it, and then isolated dx so I could just substitute dx for my value times du.
When you "arrange in the form dy/dx * du/du and replace du/du with 1", you are cancelling the fraction - it's the same process.
Is their a video for the final answer of the last question?
in what class are these students?
Oh, wow that Garry is kinda like me, but I'm younger. I mean I always do everything in my head, because it is so easy. But I had to learn to write stuff down to actually get good grades. The advice Mr. Woo gives his student is almost identical in form to what teachers have always been telling me. 😉
Calm down cool kid
Thanks sir 😊
شكرا استاد
Eeeh so what’s the answer to the last question? Can’t believe we were left hanging for the solution!
i think it is -36(3x+2)^(-4)
Hi, just something I wanted to know. Why is 75% of -4 = -3
Because logically speaking -3>-4 How can a number be 75% of a smaller number. Is it just convention?. Thanks.
@@jancelin7361 but it is larger in this case. I am talking in terms of discrete math. Not in terms of scenarios you can define math.
I guess -3/-4 = 0,75 = 75% because the minus cancels.
We calculate the percentage regarding to zero not negative infinity.
but dy/du and du/dx are not fractions. How can u cancel out du?
They are more like ratios but they can totally be worked out as fraction.
Example -
If dy/dy = u
-> dy = udx.
(Because they act like fraction)
d/dx isnt a fraction, it's more like a function
But dy/dx is a fraction
They are not really fractions, it's just convenient to think of it that way
They are fractions.
I thought I found the answer, but it's different if you use a negative exponent. I guess I got it wrong.
Hello
Hi!
The answer to the last question is 4/(3 x + 2)^3
No.
I got -36*(3x+2)^-4
@@UDHAV79 same
I think It’s 1/3.
What was the answer? I got 1/3, but I’m not sure!