Sometimes, we can confuse applying the chain rule with applying the product rule.

The product rule states that \( [ f(x) \times g(x) ]' = f'(x) \times g(x) + f(x) \times g'(x), \) while the chain rule states that \( (f \circ g )' (x) = g'(x) \times f' \circ g (x) \).

Find infinitely many pairs of functions such that

\( (f \circ g) ' = f' \circ g + f \circ g ' \)

Example: \( f(x) = e^{-x} \) and \( g(x) = 1 + x - e^{-x} \).

This is a list of Calculus proof based problems that I like. Please avoid posting complete solutions, so that others can work on it.

No vote yet

1 vote

×

Problem Loading...

Note Loading...

Set Loading...

Easy Math Editor

`*italics*`

or`_italics_`

italics`**bold**`

or`__bold__`

boldNote: you must add a full line of space before and after lists for them to show up correctlyparagraph 1

paragraph 2

`[example link](https://brilliant.org)`

`> This is a quote`

Remember to wrap math in \( ... \) or \[ ... \] to ensure proper formatting.`2 \times 3`

`2^{34}`

`a_{i-1}`

`\frac{2}{3}`

`\sqrt{2}`

`\sum_{i=1}^3`

`\sin \theta`

`\boxed{123}`

## Comments

Sort by:

TopNewestWow!

Log in to reply

Hint: \(f(x) = a(x), \; g(x) = b(x) - a(x)\)?

Log in to reply

I'm pretty sure you have the rules confused. The first one you listed is the product rule, as it is the multiplcation of two functions. The second one, which has f and g as composite functions, is in fact the chain rule...

Pretty sure thats what going on.

Log in to reply

As stated, "Sometimes, we can confuse applying the chain rule with applying the product rule."

I am intentionally asking you to find pairs of functions in which the "confused" version ends up being correct. It is certainly not true of any (differentiable) functions \(f\) and \(g\).

Log in to reply

Unless what you stated is the perceived "confused" version, then my bad. 'Twas a bit hard to notice

Log in to reply

I understand that. But in the introduction where you say "The chain rule states that [Latex stuff] while the product rule states that [more Latex stuff]" but those Latex areas should be switched because the chain rule does not state what you said nor does the product rule state what is followed.

I understand some composite functions, when differentiated, turn out to be like the product rule. But what you said in the beginning isn't true.

If it's some kind of humor I'm not seeing, I'm sorry.

Log in to reply

Log in to reply

Log in to reply