# Fundamental confusions of calculus

Discussion in 'Physics & Math' started by arfa brane, Feb 11, 2012.

Not open for further replies.
1. ### PeteIt's not rocket surgeryRegistered Senior Member

Messages:
10,167
Thanks again temur, you have been most helpful.
AlphaNumeric,
I'm good again now, so don't let this exchange stop you from closing the thread if you see fit - make your judgment based on the przyk/Tach/Trippy conversation. I'll open another thread if/when I have more to ask

Messages:
5,265

5. ### TachBannedBanned

Messages:
5,265
So after 200 posts it is still not obvious? Is the presence of v making things so difficult? It isn't a trick question. Maybe you'll find this easier to answer:

$z=3 \theta +u$
$u=sin^2(\theta)$

What is $\frac{\partial z}{\partial \theta}$?
What is $\frac{d z}{d \theta}$?

7. ### prometheusviva voce!Registered Senior Member

Messages:
2,045
For the record you were wrong and you are still wrong. The reason my posting has been sporadic recently is we're quite busy at work at the moment, I'm trying to buy a house and the other 5 people you mention raise the issues I think of before I have a chance to do it.

8. ### prometheusviva voce!Registered Senior Member

Messages:
2,045
Since I'm here, for a function of one variable $\frac{\partial z}{\partial \theta} = \frac{d z}{d \theta}$. If this wasn't the case then the method of separation of variables for solving PDE's wouldn't work.

9. ### TachBannedBanned

Messages:
5,265
Any person in good faith could link in the first part of post 18 with the example and easily identify $u$ . Now, it takes extreme bad faith , especially given multiple clarifications to still not understand the example. I admit that post 18 was terse (since I had been trying to explain the issue of derivatives of composite functions to Pete for about 50 posts already spread over two threads) but the repeated clarifications do not leave any room to misinterpret things. Having said that , $u$ can be defined as either one of the cases $sin^2(\theta)$ or $sin(\theta)$ and the result is exactly the same. So, once again, why do you bring this up?

10. ### Guest254Valued Senior Member

Messages:
1,056
Could we change the thread title to:

**Tach's** Fundamental confusions of calculus

Please? And just in case Tach's ridiculous errors are being buried in a sea of deflection and chest beating, here they are again.

11. ### TrippyALEA IACTA ESTStaff Member

Messages:
10,890
I'm done with this stupidity, feel free to rename and close the thread AN.

12. ### AlphaNumericFully ionizedRegistered Senior Member

Messages:
6,702
Sorry, I was a little tardy getting back to the thread. Blame a broken washing machine and a pile of drenched clothes for taking my attention this morning. Tach's complete lack of mathematical aptitude and general dearth of honesty has been shown again and again and everyone who wanted their pound of flesh has had a chance to use their butter knives. There's nothing to be further gained from this. If Tach feels he is surrounded by idiots with PhD after their names then he's welcome not to bother with the forum again. I'm sure we'll struggle on with our research without his 'gems of wisdom'.

[Mod action] : And so we're done.

13. ### TachBannedBanned

Messages:
5,265
That would be extremely difficult , if not downright impossible since :

$\frac{\partial z}{\partial \theta}=3$

and

$\frac{d z}{d \theta}=3+sin(2 \theta)$

Incidentally, this is also Guest254's error , posted in very large fonts, lest someone misses it.

14. ### AlphaNumericFully ionizedRegistered Senior Member

Messages:
6,702
It seems Tach got in between my post and clicking the lock button. Fortunately it basically sums up his misunderstanding, which gives a nice round to the thread.