Calculus Better Explained
Calculus Better Explained
Introduction
11
15
22
25
29
35
40
44
48
52
58
62
68
Afterword
76
78
80
I NTRODUCTION
Hi! It looks like youre interested in learning Calculus. I like you already.
This book isnt a collection of practice problems or formal theories. Hundreds
of textbooks handle that quite well; this is the guide I wish they tucked into
their front cover.
The goal is to help you:
Grasp the essence of Calculus in hours, not months
Develop lasting, practical insights you can apply to your own life
Enjoy a subject often considered humorless
Solve an end-to-end problem on your own
Build an intuitive foundation for classroom study
Most Calculus courses force you to build the car before driving it. Shouldnt
you master the physics of acceleration and the chemistry of gasoline before
touching the wheel? (Sure, if you want to kill someones interest in cars.)
Im here to yank you from class, put you in a go-kart, and let you ride
around Calculus Town. Yes, youll take control of the wheel (try to avoid
the pedestrians). Yes, youll make a few mistakes without perfect knowledge
of the internals. But youll be having fun. True understanding comes from
experiencing ideas yourself, not having them lectured to you.
After some practice, you may ignite the curiosity to explore the details
regular textbooks offer. (How can I go faster? Handle corners better? Which fuel
works best?)
A few minutes into Chapter 1, and youll visualize what Calculus does. After
an hour, youll analyze concepts using the Calculus lingo and mindset. A few
days later, after internalizing the ideas, youll begin solving famous problems on
your own.
So, how do we approach a notoriously difficult subject? Intuition-first.
INTRODUCTION
ii
After a single class, which strategy gives you a better understanding of the
material? Which helps you predict how later parts fit together? Which is more
fun?
The linear, official, approach doesnt work for me. Starting with a rough
outline and gradually improving it keeps our interest and helps us see how the
individual details are connected.
Most textbooks take the top-down approach, while this book is a blurry-tosharp guide. The fine details are out there when you need them.
INTRODUCTION
iii
Email Updates
BetterExplained.com provides high-quality, intuitive explanations to millions of
readers each year. If youd like updates on Calculus and related topics, sign up
at:
http://betterexplained.com/newsletter
Book Webpage
Nobody likes typing URLs by hand. For clickable links for to the URLs in this
book, notes, and other resources, visit:
http://betterexplained.com/calculus/book
INTRODUCTION
iv
CHAPTER
Time-Lapse Vision: You see the future path of an object laid out before
you (cool, right?). Hey, theres the moon. For the next few days itll be
white, but on the sixth itll be low in the sky, in a color I like. Ill take a
photo then.
1.1
What do X-Ray and Time-Lapse vision have in common? They examine patterns
step-by-step. An X-Ray shows the individual slices inside, and a Time-Lapse puts
each future state next to the other.
This seems pretty abstract. Lets look at the equations for circumference,
area, surface area, and volume:
Lets turn on our X-Ray vision and see where this leads. Suppose we know
circumference = 2r and we want to figure out the equation for area. What can
we do?
This is a tough question. Squares are easy to measure, but how do we work
out the size of an ever-curving shape?
Calculus to the rescue. Lets use our X-Ray vision to realize a disc is really
just a bunch of rings put together. Similar to a tree trunk, heres a step-by-step
view of a circles area:
How does this viewpoint help? Well, lets unroll those curled-up rings into
straight lines, so theyre easier to measure:
1.2
CHAPTER
P RACTICING X-R AY
AND
2.1
Ring-by-ring Analysis
Using your Time-Lapse vision, imagine how the ring-by-ring strategy accumulates over time:
Each intermediate stage is an entire mini circle on its own. i.e., when
were halfway done, we still have a circle, just one with half the regular
radius.
Each step is an increasing amount of work. Just imagine plowing a circular
field and spreading the work over several days. On the first day, you start
at the center and dont even move. The next, you make take the tightest
turn you can. Then you start doing laps, larger and larger, until you are
circling the entire yard on the last day.
The work is reasonably predictable, which may help planning. If we know
its an extra minute for each lap, then the 20th ring will take 20 minutes.
Most of the work happens in the final laps. In the first 25% of the
timelapse, weve barely grown: were adding tiny rings. Near the end, we
start to pick up steam by adding long rings, each nearly the final size.
Now lets get practical: why do trees follow a ring pattern?
A big tree must grow from a complete smaller tree. With the ring-by-ring
strategy, were always building on a complete, fully-formed circle. We arent
trying to grow the left half of the tree and then work on the right side.
In fact, many natural processes that grow (trees, bones, bubbles, etc.) take
this inside-out approach.
2.2
Slice-by-slice Analysis
Lets think about the real world: what objects use the slice-by-slice pattern,
and why?
Well food, for one. Cake, pizza, pie: we want everyone to have an equal
share. Slices are simple to cut, we get nice speedups (cutting across the cake),
and its easy to see how much is remaining. Imagine cutting circular rings from
a pie and estimating how much is left.
Now think about radar scanners: they sweep a beam in a circle, clearing
a slice of sky before moving to another angle. This strategy does leave a blind
spot in the angle you havent yet covered, a tradeoff youre hopefully aware of.
Contrast this to sonar used by a submarine or bat, which sends a sound
ring propagating in every direction. That works best for close targets (covering
every direction at once). The drawback is that unfocused propagation gets
much weaker the further out you go, as the initial energy is spread out over a
larger ring. We use megaphones and antennas to focus our signals into beams
(thin slices) to get the most range for our energy.
Logistically, if were building a circular shape from a set of slices (like the
folded sections of a paper fan), it helps to have every part be identical. Figure
out the best way to make a single slice, then mass produce them. Even better:
if one part can collapse, the entire shape can fold up!
2.3
Board-by-board Analysis
Getting the hang of X-Rays and Time-lapses? Great. Look at the progression
above, and spend a few seconds thinking of the pros and cons. Dont worry, Ill
wait.
Ready? Ok. Heres a few of my observations:
This is a very robotic pattern, with boards neatly arranged left-to-right.
The contribution from each step starts small, gradually gets larger, maxes
out in the middle, and begins shrinking again.
Our progress is somewhat unpredictable. Sure, at the halfway mark weve
finished half the circle, but the pattern rises and falls which makes it
difficult to analyze. By contrast, the ring-by-ring pattern changed the
same amount each time, always increasing. It was clear that the later
rings would add the most work. Here, its the middle section which seems
to be doing the heavy lifting.
Ok, time to figure out where this pattern shows up in the real world.
Decks and wooden structures, for one. When putting down wooden planks,
we dont want to retrace our steps (especially if there are other steps involved,
like painting). Just like a tree needs a fully-formed circle at each step, a deck
insists upon using the linear boards we can find at Home Depot.
In fact, any process with a strict pipeline might use this approach: finish
a section and move onto the next. Think about a printer that has to spray a
pattern as the paper is fed through (or these days, a 3d printer). The printer
sees a position only once, so it better make it count!
The circle doesnt need to be a literal shape. It could represent a goal youre
trying to accomplish, whether an exercise plan or topics to cover in a counseling
session.
The board approach suggests you start small, work your way up, then ease
back down. The pizza-slice approach could be tolerable (identical progress
every day), but rings could be demoralizing: every step requires more effort
than the one before.
2.4
Getting Organized
So far, weve been using natural descriptions to explain our thoughts: Take
a bunch of rings or Cut the circle into pizza slices. This conveys a general
notion, but its a bit like describing a song with Dum-de-dum-dum youre
probably the only one who knows what you mean. But a little organization can
make your intent perfectly clear.
To start, we can explain how were splitting the shape into steps. I like to
imagine a little arrow in the direction we move as we cut out each piece:
In my head, Im moving along the yellow line, calling out the steps as we go
(step forward, make a ring, step forward, make a ring. . . ).
And while the arrow shows how the rings are made, the steps are hard to
visualize because theyre jammed inside the circle. As we saw in the first lesson,
we can pull out the individual steps and line them up:
We draw a black arrow to show the trend in the size of each step. Pretty
nice, right? We can tell, at a glance, that the rings are increasing, and by the
same amount each time (the trend line is straight, like a set of stairs).
Math fans and neurotics both enjoying lining up the pieces. There is something soothing about it, I suppose: who doesnt want to line up all the pencils
that are scattered on the floor?
And since were on the topic, we might as well organize the other patterns
too:
10
In this guide well keep graphs to the level seen above: trend lines, with the
individual pieces shown. This is a foundation for later, performance-based
classes where you may work with graphs directly. But just for reference,
Archimedes laid the foundations of Calculus without x-y graphs, and found his
results without them.
2.5
Questions
Are things starting to click a bit? Thinking better with X-Rays and Time-lapses?
1. Can you describe a grandma-friendly version of what youve learned?
2. Lets expand our thinking into the 3rd dimension. Can you think of a few
ways to build a sphere? (No formulas, plain-English descriptions are fine.)
PS. It may bother you that our steps create a circle-like shape, but not a
real, smooth circle. Great question, and well get to that. But to be fair, it must
also bother you that the square pixels on a computer screen make letter-like
patterns, but not real, smooth letters. And somehow, the letter-like patterns
convey the same information as real letters!
CHAPTER
E XPANDING O UR I NTUITION
I hope you thought about the question from last time: how do we take our
X-Ray strategies into the 3rd dimension?
Heres my take:
12
Lastly, we can imagine spinning a board to make a plate, like carving a wooden
sphere with a lathe (video).
The tradeoffs in 3d are similar to the 2d versions:
Organic processes grow in shell-by-shell layers (pearls in an oyster).
Fair divisions require wedges (cutting an apple for friends).
The robotic plate approach seems easy to manufacture (weightlifting
plates).
An orange is an interesting hybrid: from the outside, it appears to be made
from shells, growing over time. But on the inside, it forms a symmetric internal
structure with wedges good for evenly distributing seeds, right? We could
analyze it both ways.
3.1
In the first lesson we had the vague notion that the circle/sphere formulas were
related:
With our X-Ray and Time-Lapse skills, we have a specific idea for how:
13
3.2
You might have noticed its getting harder to describe your ideas. Were reaching
for physical analogies (rings, boards, wedges) to explain our plans: Ok, take
that circular area, and try to make some discs out of it. Yeah, like that. Now
line those discs up into the shape of a sphere. . . .
I love diagrams and analogies, but should they be required to explain an
idea? Probably not.
Take a look at how numbers developed. At first, we used very literal symbols
for counting: I, II, III, and so on. Eventually, we realized a symbol like V could
take the place of IIIII, and even better, every digit can have its own symbol.
(The number 1 reminds us of our line-based history.)
Math notation helped in a few ways:
Symbols are shorter than words. Isnt 2 + 3 = 5 better than two
added to three is equal to five? Fun fact: In 1557, Robert Recorde
invented the equals sign, written with two parallel lines (=), because noe
2 thynges, can be moare equalle. (I agrye!)
The rules do the work for us. With Roman numerals, were essentially
recreating numbers by hand (why should VIII take so much effort to write
compared to I? Just because 8 is larger than 1? Not a good reason!). Decimals help us do the work of expressing numbers, and make them easy
to manipulate. So far, weve been doing the work of calculus ourselves:
cutting a circle into rings, realizing we can unroll them, looking up the
equation for area and measuring the resulting triangle. Couldnt the rules
help us here? You bet. We just need to figure them out.
We generalized our thinking. 2 + 3 = 5 is really twoness + threeness
= fiveness. It sounds weird, but we have an abstract quantity (not people,
or money, or cows. . . just twoness) and we see how its related to other
quantities. The rules of arithmetic are general-purpose, and its our job to
apply them to a specific scenario.
14
This last point is important. When learning addition, your teacher may have
used literal apples to show that two plus three was five. With enough practice,
you started using abstract symbols without needing a physical example, and 2
+ 3 = 5 made sense.
Calculus is similar: it works on abstract equations like f (x) = x 2 , but physical
examples are a nice starting point. When we see a shape like this:
CHAPTER
15
4.1
16
The Derivative
The derivative is the pattern of slices we get as we X-Ray a shape. Its indicated
by the black trend line, which might be flat, rising constantly, rising and falling,
etc. Now heres the trick: although the derivative generates the entire sequence
of slices, we can also extract a single slice.
Think about a function like f (x) = x 2 . It describes every possible squared
value (1, 4, 9, 16, 25, etc.), and we can graph them all on a chart. But, we can
also ask for the value of f (x) at a specific value, such as at x = 3.
The derivative is similar. Officially, its the complete pattern of slices we get
after X-Raying a shape. However, we can pull out an individual slice by asking
for the derivative at a certain value. (The derivative is a function, just like
f (x) = x 2 , and mathematicians assume youre talking about the entire function
unless you ask for a specific slice.)
So, what do we need to find the derivative? Just the shape to split apart,
and the path to follow as we cut it up (the orange arrow). The terminology is
derive <some pattern> with respect to <some direction>. For example:
The derivative of a circle with respect to the radius creates rings (which
always increase)
The derivative of a circle with respect to the perimeter creates slices (which
are equal-sized)
The derivative of a circle with respect to the x-axis creates boards (which
get larger, peak, and get smaller)
I agree that with respect to sounds formal: Honorable Grand Poombah
radius, it is with respect to you that we derive. Math is a gentlemans game, I
suppose.
Taking the derivative is also called differentiating, because we are finding
the difference between successive positions as a shape grows. As we grow the
radius of a circle, the outer ring is the difference between the size of the current
disc and the next size up.
4.2
17
Nope! We need to be specific. Weve been saying we cut a circle into rings
or pizza slices or boards. But thats not specific enough; its like a BBQ recipe
that says Cook meat. Flavor to taste.
Maybe an expert knows what to do, but we need more specifics. How large,
exactly, is each step (technically called the integrand)?
4.3
Lets learn to speak like calculus natives. Heres how we can describe our X-Ray
strategies:
18
Remember, the derivative just splits the shape into (hopefully) easy-tomeasure steps, such as rings of size 2r d r . We broke apart our lego set and
have pieces scattered on the floor. We still need an integral to glue the parts
together and measure the new size. The two commands are a tag team:
The derivative says: Ok, I split the shape apart for you. It looks like a
bunch of pieces 2r tall and d r wide.
The integral says: Oh, those pieces resemble a triangle I can measure
that! The total area of that triangle is 12 base height, which works out to
r 2 in this case.
Heres how wed write the integrals to measure the steps weve made:
19
A few notes:
Often, we write an integrand as an unspecified pizza slice or board
(use a formal-sounding name like s(p) or b(x) if you like). First, we setup
the integral, and then we worry about the exact formula for a board or
slice.
Because each integral represents slices from our original circle, we know
they will be the same. Gluing any set of slices should always return the
total area, right?
The integral is often described as the area under the curve. Its accurate,
but shortsighted. Yes, we are gluing together the rectangular slices under
the curve. But this completely overlooks the preceding X-Ray and TimeLapse thinking. Why are we dealing with a set of slices vs. a curve in the
first place? Most likely, because those slices are easier than analyzing the
shape itself (how do you directly measure a circle?).
4.4
Questions
At a high level, can you find another activity made easier with symbols, instead
of using full English sentences? Would practitioners ever go back to written
descriptions?
Math is just like that. Lets try a few phrases, even if we arent fluent yet.
Question 1: Can you describe the integrals below in Math English?
20
Assume the arrow spans half the radius. The description should follow the
format:
integrate [size of step] from [start] to [end] with respect to [path
variable]
Have an idea? Heres the answer for the first integral1 and the second
integral2 . These links go to Wolfram Alpha, an online math solver, which well
learn to use.
Question 2: Can you find the Math English way to describe our pizza-slice
idea?
21
CHAPTER
22
23
Whoa! We described our thoughts well enough that a computer did the
legwork.
We didnt need to manually unroll the rings, draw the triangle, and find
the area (which isnt overly tough in this case, but could have been). We saw
what the steps would be, wrote them down, and fed them to a computer:
boomshakalaka, we have the result. (Just worry about the definite integral
portion for now.)
Now, how about derivatives, X-Raying a pattern into steps? Well, we can ask
for that too:
Similar to above, the computer X-Rayed the formula for area and split it
step-by-step as it moved. The result is 2r , the height of the ring at every
position.
5.1
Wolfram Alpha is an easy-to-use tool: the general format for calculus questions
is
integrate [equation] from [variable=start] to [variable=end]
derive [equation] with respect to [variable]
Thats a little wordy. These shortcuts are closer to the math symbols:
\int [equation] dr - integrate equation (by default, assume we go from
r = 0 to r = r , the max value)
d/dr equation - derive equation with respect to r
Theres shortcuts for exponents (3^2 = 9), multiplication (3 * r), and
roots (sqrt(9) = 3)
Now that we have the machine handy, lets try a few of the results weve
seen so far:
24
Click the formal description to see the computer crunch the numbers. As
you might have expected, they all result in the familiar equation for area. A few
notes:
The size of the wedge is 12 base height. The base is d p (the tiny section of
perimeter) and the height is r , the distance from the perimeter back to
the center.
The size of the board is tricky. In terms of x & y coordinates, we have
x 2 + y 2 = r 2 , by the Pythagorean Theorem:
CHAPTER
6.1
Example
y
x
d
y
dx
y x
R
y dx
Notes
Split whole into identical parts
Split whole into (possibly different) parts
Accumulate identical steps
Accumulate (possibly different) steps
25
26
Division spits back the averaged-sized ring in our pattern. The derivative
gives a formula (2r ) that describes every ring (just plug in r). Similarly,
multiplication lets us scale up the average element (once weve found it) into
the full amount. Integrals let us add up the pattern directly.
Sometimes we want to use the average item, not the fancy calculus steps,
because its a simpler representation of the whole (Whats the average transaction size? I dont need the full list.). Thats fine, as long as its a conscious
choice.
6.2
Better Formulas
Algebra
Calculus
distance = speed d t
distance
time
area = height width
speed =
27
speed =
d
distance
dt
area = height d w
weight =
density d x d y d z
An equation like distance = speed time explains howRto find total distance
assuming an average speed. An equation like distance = speed d t tells us how
to find total distance by breaking time into instants (split along the t axis), and
accumulating the (potentially unique) distance traveled each instant (speed d t ).
Similarly, speed = ddt distance explains that we can split our trajectory into
time segments, and the (potentially unique) amount we moved in that time
slice was the speed.
The overused integrals are area under the curve explanation becomes
more clear. Multiplication, because it deals with static quantities, can only
measure the area of rectangles. Integrals let measurements curve and undulate
as we go: well add their contribution, regardless.
A series of multiplications becomes a series of integrals (called a triple
integral). Its beyond this primer, but your suspicion was correct: we can mimic
the multiplications and integrate several times in a row.
Math, and specifically calculus, is the language of science because it describes
relationships extremely well. When I see a formula with an integral or derivative,
I mentally convert it to multiplication or division (remembering we can handle
differently-sized elements).
6.3
Better Algebra
Algebra lets us start with one fact and systematically work out others. Imagine I
want to know the area of an unknown square. I cant measure the area, but I
overhead someone saying it was 13.3 inches on a side.
Algebra
Thinking Process
Area of square =?
Area = 13.3
Area = (13.3)2
Area = 176.89
28
Well, calculus extends algebra with two more operations: integrals and
derivatives. Now we can work out the area of a circle, algebra-style:
Algebra + Calculus
Thinking Process
Area of circle =?
d
Area = 2r
dr
R
R d
Area = 2r
dr
Area = r 2
The abbreviated notation helps see the big picture. If the integrand only
uses a single variable (as in 2r ), we can assume were using d r from r = 0 to
r = r . This helps us think of integrals and derivatives like squares and square
roots: operations that cancel!
Its pretty neat: gluing together and splitting apart should behave like
opposites, right?
R
With our
simpler notation, we can write ddr Area = Area instead of the bulky
Rr
0
d
dr
6.4
Area d r = Area.
CHAPTER
7.1
30
df
dx
Notice how we express the derivative as d x instead of ddx f (x). What gives?
It turns out theres a few different versions we can use.
Think about the various ways we express multiplication:
Times symbol: 3 4 (used in elementary school)
Dot: 3 4 (used in middle school)
Implied multiplication with parentheses: (x + 4)(x + 3)
Implied multiplication with a space: 2r d r
31
The more subtle the symbol, the more we focus on the relationship between the quantities; the more visible the symbol, the more we focus on the
computation.
The notation for derivatives is similar:
7.2
Now lets work in the other direction: given the sequence of steps, can we find
the size of the original pattern?
In our fence-building scenario, its fairly straightforward. Solving
df
=4
dx
32
means answering What pattern has an output change of 4 times the input
change?.
Well, weve just seen that f (x) = 4x results in f 0 (x) = 4. So, if were given
f 0 (x) = 4, we can guess the original function must have been f (x) = 4x .
Im pretty sure were right (what else could the integral of 4 be?), but lets
compare this with the computer:
Whoa theres two different answers (definite and indefinite). Why? Well,
theres many functions that could increase cost by $4/foot! Heres a few:
Cost = $4 per foot, or f (x) = 4x
Cost = $4 + $4 per foot, or f (x) = 4 + 4x
Cost = $10 + $4 per foot, or f (x) = 10 + 4x
There could be a fixed per-order fee, with the fence cost added in. All the
equation f 0 (x) = 4 says is that each additional foot of fencing is $4, but we dont
know the starting conditions.
The definite integral tracks the accumulation
of a set amount of slices.
R
The range can be numbers, such as 013 4, which measures the slices from
x=0 to x=13 (13 4 = 52). If the range includes a variable (0 to x), then
the accumulation will be an equation (4x ).
The indefinite integral finds the actual formula that created the pattern
of steps, not just
R the accumulation in that range. Its written with just an
integral sign: f (x). And as weve seen, the possibilities for the original
function should allow for a starting offset of C.
The notation for integrals can be fast-and-loose, and its confusing. Are we
looking for an accumulation, or the original function? Are we leaving out d x ?
These details are often omitted, so its important to feel whats happening.
7.3
33
The little secret of integrals is that we dont need to solve them directly. Instead
of trying to glue slices together to find out their area, we just learn to recognize
the derivatives of functions weve already seen.
If we know the derivative of 4x is 4, then if someone asks for the integral
of 4, we can respond with 4x (plus C, of course). Its like memorizing the
squares of numbers, not the square roots. When someone asks for the square
root of 121, dig through and remember that 11 11 = 121.
An analogy: Imagine an antiques dealer who knows the original vase just
from seeing a pile of shards.
How does he do it? Well, he takes replicas in the back room, drops them,
and looks at the pattern of pieces. Then he comes to your pile and says Oh, I
think this must be a Ming Dynasty Vase from the 3rd Emperor.
He doesnt try to glue your pile back together hes just seen that exact vase
break before, and your pile looks the same!
Now, there may be piles hes never seen, that are difficult or impossible to
recognize. In that case, the best he can do is to just add up the pieces (with a
computer, most likely). He might determine the original vase weighed 13.78
pounds. Thats a data point, fine, but its not as nice as knowing what the vase
was before it shattered.
This insight was never really explained to me: its painful to add up (possibly
changing) steps directly, especially when the pattern gets complicated. So, just
learn to recognize the pattern from the derivatives weve already seen.
7.4
Gluing together equally-sized steps looks like regular multiplication, right? You
bet. If we wanted 3 steps (0 to 1, 1 to 2, 2 to 3) of size 2, we might write:
3
Z
0
2 dx = 6
Z
0
7.5
2 d x = 26
Have an idea how linear functions behave? Great. We can make a few abstract
rules like working out the rules of algebra for ourselves.
If we know our output is a scaled version of our input ( f (x) = ax ), the
derivative (pattern of changes) is
34
d
ax = a
dx
That is, the ratio of each output step to each input step is a constant a (4,
in our examples above). And now that weve broken the vase, we can work
backwards: if we accumulate steps of size a , they must have come from a
pattern similar to a x (plus
R C, of course).
R
Notice how I wrote a and not a d x I wanted to focus on a , and not
details like the width of the step (d x ). Part of calculus is learning to expose the
right amount of detail.
One last note: if our output does not react at all to our input (well charge
you a constant $2 no matter how much you buy. . . including nothing!) then
steps are a constant 0:
d
a =0
dx
CHAPTER
To the untrained eye, you have single a 10 10 garden, which uses 40 feet
of perimeter fencing (10 4) and 100 square feet of topsoil (10 10). (Assume
topsoil is sold by the square foot, with a standard thickness.)
8.1
Thats it? The analysis just figures out the current perimeter and square footage?
No way.
By now, you should be clamoring to use X-Ray and Time-Lapse vision to see
whats happening under the hood. Why settle for a static description when we
can know the step-by-step description too?
We can analyze the behavior of the perimeter pretty easily:
Perimeter = 4x
35
36
d
Perimeter = 4
dx
The visual is helpful, but not required. After our exposure to how lines
behave, we can glance at an equation like p = 4x and realize that p jumps by 4
whenever x jumps by 1.
8.2
Changing Area
Now, how does area change? Since squares are fairly new, lets X-Ray the shape
as it grows:
x2
1 (1 2 0 2 = 1 )
3 (2 2 1 2 = 3 )
5 (3 2 2 2 = 5 )
16
25
11
36
13
49
15
37
Ah! Growing to the next-sized square means weve added a horizontal and
vertical strip (x + x ) and a corner piece (1). If we currently have a square with
side x , the jump to the next square is 2x + 1. (If we have a 5 5 square, getting
to a 6 6 will be a jump of 2(5) + 1 = 11. And yep, 36 25 = 11.)
Again, the visualization was nice, but it took effort. Algebra can simplify the
process.
In this setup, if we set our change to d x = 1, we get
df
f (x + 1) f (x)
(x + 1)2 x 2
(x 2 + 2x + 1) x 2
2x + 1
8.3
38
The derivative takes a shape, a direction to cut, and finds a pattern of slices.
Can we work backwards, from the slices to the shape? Lets see.
Suppose the veggie mafia spies on your topsoil and fencing orders. They
cant see your garden directly, but what can they deduce from your purchases?
Lets say they observe a constant amount of fencing being delivered (4, 4, 4,
4. . . ) but increasing orders of topsoil (1, 3, 5, 7, 9, 11. . . ). What can they work
out?
A low-level goon might just add up the total amount accumulated (the
definite integral): Heya boss, looks like theyve built some garden with a total
perimeter of 40-feet, and total area of 100 square feet.
But thats not good enough! The goon doesnt know the shape youre trying
to build. He saw order after order go by without noticing the deeper pattern.
The crime boss is different: he wants the indefinite integral, the pattern
you are following. Hes savvy enough to track the pattern as the orders come
in: The area is increasing 1, 3, 5, 7. . . thats following a 2x + 1 area increase
pattern!
Now, there are likely many shapes that could grow their area by 2x + 1. But,
combined with a constant perimeter increase of 4, he suspects youre making a
square garden after a few deliveries.
How does the godfather do it? Again, by working backwards. Hes split
apart enough shapes (triangles, squares, rectangles, etc.) that he has a large
table of before-and-afters, just like the antiques dealer.
When he sees a change of 2x +1, a square (x 2 ) is a strong candidate. Another
option might be a right triangle with sides x and 2x . Its area equation is
1
2
2 x 2x = x , so the area would change the same as a square.
And when he sees a perimeter change of a steady 4, he knows the perimeter
must be 4x . Ah! There arent too many shapes with both properties: a square
is his guess. (With enough practice, you start to recognize common patterns;
tools like Wolfram Alpha can help.)
Now suppose your orders change: your fencing deliveries drop to (2, 2, 2,
2. . . ) and your topsoil orders change to (20, 20, 20, 20). Whats going on?
Make a guess if you like.
Ready?
The veggie boss figures youve moved to a rectangular garden, with one side
determined by x , and the other side a fixed 20 feet, for a 20-by-x rectangle.
Does this guess work? Assuming this is the pattern, lets measure the
perimeter, area, and how they change:
Perimeter
20 + 20 + x + x = 40 + 2x
d
Perimeter
dx
Area
20x
d
Area
dx
20
39
Wow, it checks out: the changes in perimeter and area match the patterns
(2, 2, 2. . . ) and (20, 20, 20. . . ). No wonder hes the godfather.
Lastly, what if the godfather saw topsoil orders of (5, 7, 9, 11, 13)? He
might assume youre still building a square (2x +1 pattern), but you started with
a 2 2 garden. Your first area jump was by 5, which would have happened if x
was already 2 (solve 2x + 1 = 5 and we see x = 2).
The mob boss is a master antiques dealer: he sees the pattern in the pieces
youre bringing and quickly determines the original shape (indefinite integral).
The henchman can only tell you the running totals so far (definite integral).
8.4
Wrapping It All Up
It looks like were ready for another rule, to explain how squares change. If we
leave d x as it is, we can write:
d 2
x
dx
=
=
=
=
=
f (x + d x) f (x)
dx
(x + d x)2 (x)2
dx
x 2 + 2x d x + (d x)2 x 2
dx
2x d x + (d x)2
dx
2x + d x
Ok! Thats the abbreviated way of saying Grow by two sides and the corner.
Lets plug this into the computer to check:
CHAPTER
9.1
Heres a quick brainteaser for you. Two friends are 10 miles apart, moving
towards each other at 5mph each. A mosquito files quickly between them,
touching one person, then the other, on and on, until the friends high-five and
the mosquito is squished.
Lets say the mosquito travels a zippy 20mph as it goes. Can you figure out
how far it flew before its demise?
Yikes. This one is tricky: once the mosquito leaves the first person, touches
the second, and turns around. . . the first person has moved closer! We have an
infinite number of ever-diminishing distances to add up. The question seems
painfully difficult to solve, right?
Well, how about this reasoning: from the perspective of the people walking,
theyre going to walk for an hour total. After all, they start 10 miles apart, and
the gap shrinks at 10 miles per hour (5mph + 5mph). Therefore, the mosquito
must be flying for an hour, and go 20 miles.
Whoa! Did we just find the outcome of a process with an infinite number of
steps? I think so!
40
9.2
41
Its time to turn our step-by-step thinking into overdrive. Can we think about a
finite shape being split into infinite parts?
In the beginning of the course, we saw a circle could be split into rings.
How many? Well, an infinite number!
A number line can be split into an infinite number of neighboring points.
How many decimals would you say there are between 1.0 and 2.0?
The path of a mosquito can be seen as a whole, or a journey subdivided
into an infinite number of segments.
When we have two viewpoints (the mosquito, and the walkers), we can pick
the one thats easier to work with. In this case, the walkers holistic viewpoint is
simpler. With the circle, its easier to think about the rings themselves. Its nice
to have both options available.
Heres another example: can you divide a cake into 3 equal portions, by only
cutting into quarters?
Its a weird question. . . but possible! Cut the entire cake into quarters. Share
3 pieces and leave 1. Cut the remaining piece into quarters. Share 3 pieces,
leave 1. Keep repeating this process: at every step, everyone has received an
equal share, and the remaining cake will be split evenly as well. Wouldnt this
plan maintain an even split among 3 people?
Were seeing the intuition behind infinite X-Ray and Time-lapse vision:
zooming in to turn a whole into an infinite sequence. At first, we might think
dividing something into infinite parts requires each part to be nothing. But,
thats not right: the number line can be subdivided infinitely, yet theres a finite
gap between 1.0 and 2.0.
9.3
42
Even though the rendering is different, we see the idea being pointed to.
All three versions, from perfectly smooth to jagged, create the same letter A in
our heads (or, are you unable to read words when written out with rectangular
pixels?). An infinite sequence can point to the same result wed find if we took
it all at once.
In calculus, there are detailed rules about how to find what result an infinite
set of steps points to. And, there are certain sequences that cannot be worked
out. But, for this primer, well deal with functions that behave nicely.
Were used to jumping between finite representations of the same idea (5
= V = IIIII). Now were seeing we can convert between a finite and infinite
representation of an idea, similar to 13 = .333 . . . = .3 + .03 + .003 + . . ..
When we turned a circle into a ring-triangle, we said The infinitely-many
rings in our circle can be turned into the infinitely-many boards that make up a
triangle. And the resulting triangle is easy to measure.
43
A process with limited (but improving) precision can point to the same
result as one with infinite precision
In Calculus terms, this means the conclusions drawn from our finite (but
growing) sequence of steps can be trusted1 .
1 Calculus is a powerful but not flawless tool. Jumpy, artificial patterns trip it up and cant be
analyzed. Luckily, most naturally-occurring patterns can be.
CHAPTER
10
T HE T HEORY O F D ERIVATIVES
The last lesson showed that an infinite sequence of steps could have a finite
conclusion. Lets put it into practice, and see how breaking change into infinitely
small parts can point to the the true amount.
10.1
Imagine youre a doctor trying to measure a patients heart rate while exercising.
You put a guy on a treadmill, strap on the electrodes, and get him running. The
machine spits out 180 beats per minute. That must be his heart rate, right?
Nope. Thats his heart rate when observed by doctors and covered in electrodes.
Wouldnt that scenario be stressful? And what if your Nixon-era electrodes get
tangled on themselves, and tug on his legs while running?
Ah. We need the electrodes to get some measurement. But, right afterwards,
we need to remove the effect of the electrodes themselves. For example, if we
measure 180 bpm, and knew the electrodes added 5 bpm of stress, wed know
the true heart rate was 175.
The key is making the knowingly-flawed measurement, getting a reading,
then correcting it as if the instrument was never there.
10.2
Measuring the derivative is just like putting electrodes on a function and making
it run. For f (x) = x 2 , we stick an electrode of +1 onto it, to see how it reacted:
44
45
The horizontal stripe is the result of our change applied along the top of the
shape. The vertical stripe is our change moving along the side. And whats the
corner?
Its part of the horizontal change interacting with the vertical one! This
is an electrode getting tangled in its own wires, a measurement artifact that
needs to go.
10.3
Step
Example
f (x) = x 2
f (x + d x) = (x + d x)2 = x 2 + 2x d x + (d x)2
d f = f (x + d x) f (x) = 2x d x + (d x)2
df
dx
2x + d x = 2x
d 2
dx x
on our own:
= 2x + d x
46
47
theories of exactly how we throw away d x arent necessary to master today. The
key is realizing there are measurement artifacts the shadow of the camera in
the photo that must be removed to accurately describe the true behavior.
(Still shaky about exactly how d x can appear and disappear? Youre in good
company. This question took top mathematicians decades to resolve. Heres a
deeper discussion of how the theory works.)
CHAPTER
11
11.1
If derivatives and integrals are opposites, we can sidestep the laborious accumulation process found in definite integrals.
For example, what is 1 + 3 + 5 + 7 + 9? The hard way, computing the
definite integral directly, is to add up the items directly. (What about 50 items?
500?)
The easy way is to realize this pattern of numbers comes from a growing
square. We know the last change (+9) happens at x = 4, so weve built up to a
55 square. Therefore, the sum of the entire sequence is 25:
48
49
b
a
Intuitively, I read this as Adding up all the changes from a to b is the same
as getting the difference between a and b. Formally, youll see f (x) = steps(x)
and F (x) = Original(x), which I think is confusing. Label the steps as steps, and
the original as the original.
Why is this cool? The definite integral is a gritty mechanical computation,
and the indefinite integral is a nice, clean formula. Just take the difference
between the endpoints to know the net result of what happened in the middle!
(That makes sense, right?)
11.2
Ok. Part 1 said that if we have the original function, we can skip the manual
computation of the steps. But how do we find the original?
FTOC Part Deux to the rescue!
Lets pretend theres some original function (currently unknown) that tracks
the accumulation:
Z
Accumulation(x) =
steps(x)d x
a
The FTOC says the derivative of that magic function will be the steps we
have:
Accumulation0 (x) = steps(x)
50
Now we can work backwards. If we can find some random function, take its
derivative, notice that it matches the steps we have, we can use that function as
our original!
Skip the painful process of thinking about what function could make the
steps we have. Just take a bunch of them, break them, and see which matches
up. Its our vase analogy, remember? The FTOC gives us official permission to
work backwards. In my head, I think The next step in the total accumulation is
our current amount! Thats why the derivative of the accumulation matches the
steps we have.
Technically, a function whose derivative is equal to the current steps is called
an anti-derivative (One anti-derivative of 2 is 2x ; another is 2x + 10). The FTOC
tells us any anti-derivative will be the original pattern (+C of course).
This is surprising its like saying everyone who behaves like Steve Jobs is
Steve Jobs. But in Calculus, if a function splits into pieces that match the pieces
we have, it was their source.
The practical conclusion is integration and differentiation are opposites.
Have a pattern of steps? Integrate to get the original. Have the original?
Differentiate to get the pattern of steps. Jump back and forth as many times as
you like.
11.3
Next Steps
51
By now, we have an idea that the strategy above is possible. By the last
chapter, youll be able to walk through the exact calculations on your own.
CHAPTER
12
We cant just combine the first digits (1010) and the second (35) and call
it done. We have to walk through the cross-multiplication.
Calculus is similar. If we have the whole function, we can blithely say that
f (x) has derivative f 0 (x). But that isnt illuminating, or explaining what happens
behind the scenes.
If we can describe our function in terms of a building block x (such as
f (x) = 3x 2 + x ), then we should be able to find the derivative, the pattern of
changes, in terms of that same building block. If we have two types of building
blocks ( f = a b ), well get the derivative in terms of those two building blocks.
Heres the general strategy:
Imagine a scenario with a few building blocks (ar ea = l eng t h wi d t h )
Let every component change
Measure the change in the overall system
Remove the measurement artifacts (our instruments interfering with each
other)
Once we know how systems break apart, we can reverse-engineer them into
the integral (yay for the FTOC!).
12.1
Addition
Lets start off easy: how does a system with two added components behave?
In the real world, this could be sending two friends (Frank and George) to
build a fence. Lets say Frank gets the wood, and George gets the paint. Whats
the total cost?
Total = Franks cost + Georges cost
52
53
The derivative of the entire system, dd xt , is the cost per additional foot.
Intuitively, we suspect the total increase is the sum of the increases in the parts:
dt
d f dg
=
+
dx dx dx
That relationship makes sense, right? Lets say Franks cost is $3/foot for
the wood, and George adds $0.50/foot for the paint. If we ask for another foot,
the total cost will increase by $3.50.
Heres the math for that result:
Original: f + g
New: ( f + d f ) + (g + d g )
Change: ( f + d f ) + (g + d g ) ( f + g ) = d f + d g
In my head, I imagine x , the amount you requested, changing silently in a
corner. This creates a visible change in f (size d f ) and g (size d g ), and we see
the total change as d f + d g .
It seems we should just combine the total up front, writing t ot al = 3.5x not
t ot al = f (x) + g (x) = 3x + 0.5x . Normally, we would simplify an equation, but its
sometimes helpful to list every contribution (total = base + shipping + tax). In
our case, we see Frank contributes the most to the price.
Remembering the derivative is the per d x rate, we write:
d f dg
d
f (x) + g (x) =
+
dx
dx dx
Well express the derivative using a single quote ( f 0 ), not with a ratio ( d x ).
Were most interested in the relationship between the parts (addition),
not the gritty details of the parts themselves.
So now the addition rule becomes:
( f + g )0 = f 0 + g 0
Much better! Heres how I read it: Take a system made of several parts:
( f + g ). The change in the overall system, ( f + g )0 , can be found by adding the
12.2
54
Multiplication
Lets try a tricker scenario. Instead of inputs that are added (almost oblivious to
each other), what if they are multiplied?
Suppose Frank and George are making a rectangular garden for you. Frank
handles the width and George takes care of the height. Whenever you clap, they
move. . . but by different amounts!
Franks steps are 3-feet long, but Georges are only 2-feet long (zookeeping
accident, dont ask). How can we describe the system?
Area = width height = f (x) g (x)
f (x) = 3x
g (x) = 2x
We have linear parts, so the derivatives are simple: f 0 (x) = 3 and g 0 (x) = 2.
What happens on the next clap?
55
=f
dg
df
+g
dx
dx
( f g )0 = f g 0 + g f 0
12.3
56
Inverses can be tough to visualize: as x gets bigger, x1 gets smaller. Lets take it
slow.
Suppose youre sharing a cake with Frank. Youve just cut it in half, about to
take a bite and. . . George shuffles in. He looks upset, and youre not about to
mention the fresh set of claw marks.
But youve just cut the cake in half, what can you do?
Cut it again. You and Frank can cut your existing portion in thirds, and give
George a piece:
Neat! Now everyone has 1/3 of the total. You gave up 1/3 of your amount
(1/2), that is, you each gave George 1/6 of the total.
Time to eat! But just as youre about to bite in. . . the veggie godfather walks
in. Oh, hell definitely want a piece. What do you do?
Cut it again. Everyone smooshes together their portion, cuts it in fourths,
and hands one piece to the Don. The cake is split evenly again.
This is step-by-step thinking applied to division:
Your original share is
1
x
Someone walks in
Your new share becomes
1
x+1
How did your amount of cake change? Well, you took your original slice
1
( x1 ), cut it into the new number of pieces ( x+1
), and gave one away (the change
is negative):
1
1 1
=
x x + 1 x(x + 1)
=
x + d x x x(x + d x) x(x + d x) x(x + d x)
After finding the total change (and its annoying algebra), we divide by dx to
get the change on a per dx basis:
1
x(x + d x)
57
1
1
= 2
x(x + 0)
x
Phew! Weve found how an 1/x split changes as more people are added.
Lets try it out: You are splitting a $1000 bill among 5 people. A sixth person
enters, how much money do you save?
Youll personally save 1/5 1/6 = 1/30 of the total cost (cut your share into
6 pieces, give the new guy one portion to pay). Thats about 3%, or 30. Not bad
for a quick calculation!
Lets work it backwards: how large is our group when were saving about
1
$100 per person? Well, $100 is 1/10 of the total. Since 312 10
, well hit that
savings rate around x=3 people.
And yep, going from 3 to 4 people means each persons share goes from
$333.33 to $250 about $100. Not bad! (If we added people fractionally, we
could hit the number exactly.)
12.4
Questions
We didnt explicitly talk about scaling by a constant, such as finding the derivative of f (x) = 3x . Can you use the product rule to figure out how it changes?
(Hint: imagine a rectangle with a fixed 3 for one side, and x for the other).
Now, how about the addition rule? How would f (x) = x + x + x behave?
CHAPTER
13
f 0 +g0
( f g )0
0
1
x
f g0 +g f 0
1
x2
Instead of blasting through more rules, step back. Is there a pattern here?
13.1
Combining Perspectives
Imagine a business with interacting departments, or a machine with interconnected parts. What happens when we make a change? Theres a potential
impact on each part.
If our business has 4 departments, and we make a policy change, there are 4
perspectives to consider. It sounds simple when written out: whenever a change
happens, see what happens to each part!
No matter the specific interaction between parts F and G (addition, subtraction, multiplication, exponents. . . ), we just have two perspectives to consider:
58
59
Aha! Thats why the rules for ( f + g )0 and ( f g )0 are two added perspectives.
The derivative of X1 has a perspective because theres just one moving part, x.
(If you like, there is a contribution from 1 about the change it experiences:
nothing. No matter how much you yell, 1 stays 1.)
The exact contribution from a perspective depends on the interaction:
With addition, each part adds a direct change (d f + d g ).
With multiplication, each part thinks itll add a rectangular strip ( f d g +
g d f ). (Im using d f instead of f 0 to help us think about the slice being
added.)
You might forget the exact form of the multiplication rule. But you can think
The derivative of f g must be something with d f + something with d g .
Lets go further: what about the derivative of a b + c ? You guessed it, 3
perspectives that should be added: something involving d a plus something
involving d b plus something involving d c .
We can predict the shape of derivatives for gnarly equations. Whats the
derivative of:
xy
u
v
Wow. I cant rattle that off, but I can say itll be something involving 4
additions (d x , d y , d u and d v ). Guess the shape of a derivative, even if you
dont know the exact description.
Why does this work? Well, suppose we had a change that was influenced by
both d a and d b , such as 15 d a d b thatd be our instrument interfering with
itself!
Only direct changes on a single variables are counted (such as 3d a or 12d b ),
and changes on changes like 15 d a d b are ignored.
13.2
Dimensional Intuition
Remember that derivatives are a fancier form of division. What happens when
3
we do a division like xx ? We divide volume by length, and get area (one
dimension down).
What happens when we do ddx x 3 ? You might not know yet, but you can bet
well be dropping a dimension.
Dimensions
Example
Description
x3
-1
-2
-3
1
x
1
x2
1
x3
60
13.3
You can think about the dimension of a derivative without digging into a specific
formula. Imagine the following scenario:
Take a string and wrap it tight around a quarter. Take another string and
wrap it tight around the Earth.
Lengthen both strings, adding more to the end, so theres a 1-inch gap
all the way around the quarter, and a 1-inch gap all the way around the
Earth (like having a ring floating around Saturn).
Quiz: Which scenario needed more extra string to create? Is it more string
to put a 1-inch gap around the quarter, or a 1-inch gap around the Earth?
61
We can crunch through the formula, but think higher-level. Because circumference is a 1-d line, its reaction to change (the derivative) will be a constant.
No matter the current size, the circumference will change the same amount
with every push. So, the extra string needed is the same for both! (About 6.28
inches per inch of radius increase).
Now, suppose we were painting the sphere instead of putting a string around
it. Ah, well, area is squared, therefore the derivative is a dimension lower
(linear). If we have a 5-inch and 10-inch sphere, and make them 1-inch bigger
each, the larger sphere will require double the extra paint.
13.4
Questions
CHAPTER
14
f 0 +g0
( f g )0
0
1
x
f g0 +g f 0
1
x2
14.1
Power Rule
d 2
dx x
= 2x :
We can visualize the change, and ignore the artificial corner piece. Now,
how about visualizing x 3 ?
62
63
The process is similar. We can glue a plate to each side to expand the cube.
The missing gutters represent artifacts, where our new plates would interact
with each other.
I have to keep reminding myself: the gutters arent real! They represent
growth that doesnt happen at this step. After our growth, we melt the cube
into its new, total area, and grow again. Counting the gutters would overestimate the growth that happened in this step. (Now, if were forced to take
integer-sized steps, then the gutters are needed but with infinitely-divisible
decimals, we can change smoothly.)
From the diagram, we might guess:
d 3
x = 3x 2
dx
And thats right! But we had to visualize the result. Abstractions like
algebra let us handle scenarios we cant visualize, like a 10-dimensional shape.
Geometric shapes are a nice, visual starting point, but we need to move beyond
them.
We might begin analyzing a cube with using algebra like this:
(x + d x)3 = (x + d x)(x + d x)(x + d x) = (x 2 + 2x d x + (d x)2 )(x + d x) = ...
Yikes. The number of terms is getting scary, fast. What if we wanted the
10th power? Sure, there are algebra shortcuts, but lets think about the problem
holistically.
Our cube x 3 = x x x has 3 components: the sides. Call them a, b and c to
keep em straight. Intuitively, we know the total change has a contribution from
each side:
64
Lets write this in terms of x , the original side. Every side is identical,
(a = b = c = x ) and the changes are the same (d a = d b = d c = d x ), so we get:
(d x x x) + (d x x x) + (d x x x) = x 2 d x + x 2 d x + x 2 d x = 3x 2 d x
Neat! Now, the brain-dead memorization strategy is to think Pull down the
exponent and decrease it by one. That isnt learning!
Think like this:
x 3 has 3 identical perspectives.
When the system changes, all 3 perspectives contribute identically. Therefore, the derivative will be 3 somet hi ng .
The something is the change in one side (d x ) multiplied by the remaining sides (x x ). The changing side goes from x to d x and the exponent
lowers by one.
We can reason through the rule! For example, whats the derivative of x 5 ?
Well, its 5 identical perspectives (5 somet hi ng ). Each perspective is me
changing (d x ) and the 4 other guys staying the same (x x x x = x 4 ). So the
combined perspective is just 5x 4 .
The general Power Rule:
d n
x = nx n1
dx
Now we can memorize the shortcut bring down the exponent and subtract,
just like we know that putting a 0 after a number multiplies by 10. Shortcuts
are fine once you know why they work!
14.2
65
Integrals of Powers
Lets try integrating a power, reverse engineering a set of changes into the
original pattern.
Imagine a construction site. Day 1, they order three 11 wooden planks.
The next day, they order three 22 wooden planks. Then three 33 planks.
Then three 44 planks. What are they building?
My guess is a cube. They are building a shell, layer by layer, and perhaps
putting grout between the gutters to glue them together.
Similarly, if we see a series of changes like 3x 2 , we can visualize the plates
being assembled to build a cube:
Z
3x 2 = x 3
Ok we took the previous result and worked backward. But what about the
integral of plain old x 2 ? Well, just imagine that incoming change is being split 3
ways:
x2 =
x2 x2 x2 1 2
+
+
= 3x
3
3
3
3
Ah! Now we have 3 plates (each 1/3 of the original size) and we can
integrate a smaller cube. Imagine the incoming material being split into 3
piles to build up the sides:
Z
x2 =
1
1
3x 2 =
3
3
1
3x 2 = x 3
3
xn =
1
x n+1
n +1
After some practice, youll do the division automatically. But now you know
why its needed: we have to split the incoming change material among several
sides. (Building a square? Share changes among 2 sides. Building a cube?
Share among 3 sides. Building a 4d hypercube? Call me.)
14.3
Remember the cake metaphor? We cut our existing portion ( x1 ) into x slices,
and give one away.
f
Now, how can we find the derivative of g ? One component in the system is
trying to grow us, while the other divides us up. Which wins?
66
Its our little secret that b is really g1 , which behaves like a division. We just
want to think about the big picture of how the rectangle changes.
Now, since a is just a rename of f , we can swap in d a = d f . But how do we
swap out b ? Well, we have:
b=
1
g
db
1
= 2
dg
g
db =
1
dg
g2
Ah! This is our cake cutting. As g grows, we lose d b = g12 dg from the b
side. The total impact is:
1
1
+ 2 dg f
(a b)0 = (d a b) + (d b a) = d f
g
g
This formula started with the product rule, and we plugged in their real
values. Might as well put f and g back into (a b)0 , to get the Quotient Rule
(aka the Division Rule):
0
f
1
1
= df
+ 2 dg f
g
g
g
1
1
g d f
f dg
g d f f dg
df
+ 2 dg f =
=
g
g
g2
g2
g2
And I dont like it, no maam, not one bit! This version no longer resembles
its ancestor, the product rule.
In practice, the Quotient Rule is a torture device designed to test your
f
memorization skills; I rarely remember it. Just think of g as f g1 , and use the
product rule like weve done.
14.4
67
Questions
Lets do a few warm-ups to test our skills. Can you solve these bad boys?
d 4
x =?
dx
d
3x 5 = ?
dx
(You can check your answers with Wolfram Alpha, such as d/dx x^4.)
Again, dont get lost in the symbols. Think I have x 4 what pattern of
changes will I see as I make x larger?.
Ok! How about working backwards, and doing some integrals?
Z
2x 2 = ?
x3 = ?
Ask yourself, What original pattern would create steps in the pattern 2x 2 ?
Trial-and-error is ok! Try a formula, test it, and adjust it. Personally, I like to
move aside the 2 and just worry about the integral of x 2 :
Z
2x 2 = 2
x2 = ?
How do you know if youre right? Take the derivative you are the antiques
dealer! I brought you a pattern of shards (2x 2 ) and you need to tell me the
vase they came from. Once you have guessed a vase, break a replica in the back
room and make sure you get 2x 2 back out. Then youll be confident in your
answer (and your manager will be thrilled!).
Were getting ready to work through the circle equations ourselves, and
recreate results found by Archimedes, likely the greatest mathematician of all
time.
CHAPTER
15
69
With the official rules in hand, we can blast through the calculations and
find the circle/sphere formulas on our own. It may sound strange, but the
formulas feel different to me almost alive when you see them morphing in
front of you. Lets jump in.
15.1
70
Lets walk through it. The notion of a ring-by-ring timelapse sharpens into
integrate the rings, from nothing to the full radius and ultimately:
r
Area =
2r d r
0
Each ring has height 2r and width d r , and we want to accumulate that
area to make our disc.
How can we solve this equation? By working backwards. We can move the
2 part outside the integral (remember the scaling property?) and focus on the
integral of r :
r
Z
2
0
r d r =?
What pattern makes steps of size r ? Well, we know that r 2 creates steps of
size 2r , which is twice what we need. Half that should be perfect. Lets try it
out:
d 1 2 1 d 2 1
r =
r = 2r = r
dr 2
2 dr
2
Yep, 12 r 2 gives us the steps we need! Now we can plug in the solution to the
integral:
r
Area = 2
1
r d r = 2 r 2 = r 2
2
This is the same result as making the ring-triangle in the first lesson, but we
manipulated equations, not diagrams. Not bad! Itll help even more once we
get to 3d. . .
15.2
Lets get fancier. We can take our discs, thicken them into plates, and build a
sphere:
71
Ok. We have size of each plate, and can integrate to find the volume, right?
Not so fast. Instead of starting on the left side, with a negative x-coordinate,
moving to 0, and then up to the max, lets just think about a sphere as two
halves:
To find the total volume, get the volume of one half, and double it. This is a
common trick: if a shape is symmetrical, get the size of one part and scale it
up. Often, its easier to work out 0 to max than min to max, especially when
min is negative.
Ok. Now lets solve it:
72
Whoa! Quite an equation, there. It seems like a lot, but well work through
it:
r
Volume = 2
y 2 d x
p
r 2 x2
The square root looks intimidating at first, but its being plugged into y 2 and
the exponent will cancel it out. After plugging in y and moving outside the
integral, we have the much nicer:
r
Volume = 2
Volume = 2
r 2 x2
dx
r 2 x2 d x
The parentheses are often dropped because its understood that d x is multiplied by the entire size of the step. We know the step is (r 2 x 2 )d x and not
r 2 (x 2 d x).
Lets talk about r and x for a minute. r is the radius of the entire sphere,
such as 15 inches. You can imagine asking I want the volume of a sphere
with a radius of 15 inches. Fine.
To figure this out, well create plates at each x-coordinate, from x = 0 up to
x = 15 (and double it). x is the bookkeeping entry that remembers which plate
were on. We could work out the volume from x = 0 to x = 7.5, lets say, and
wed build a partial sphere (maybe useful, maybe not). But we want the whole
shebang, so we let x go from 0 to the full r .
Time to solve this bad boy. What equation has steps like r 2 x 2 ?
73
First, lets use the addition rule: steps like a b are made from two patterns
(one making a , the other making b ).
Lets look at the first pattern, the steps of size r 2 . Were moving along the
x-axis, and r is a number that never changes: its 15 inches, the size of our
sphere. This max radius never depends on x , the position of the current plate.
When a scaling factor doesnt change during the integral (r , , etc.), it can
be moved outside and scaled up at the end. So we get:
Z
r2 dx = r2
d x = r 2x
x 2 d x =?
Weve seen this before. Since x 3 has steps of 3x 2 , taking 1/3 of that amount
should be just right. And we can check that our integral is correct:
3
( x3 )
d
1 3
1 d 3
1
x =
x = 3x 2 = x 2
dx
3
3 dx
3
It works out! Over time, youll learn to trust the integrals you reverseengineer, but when starting out, its good to check the derivative. With the
integrals solved, we plug them in:
Z
2
1
r 2 x 2 d x = 2(r 2 x x 3 )
3
Whats left? Well, our formula still has x inside, which measures the volume
from 0 to some final value of x . In this case, we want the full radius, so we set
x =r:
1
1
1
2
4
2(r 2 x x 3 ) 2 (r 2 )r r 3 = 2 r 3 r 3 = 2 r 3 = r 3
set x=r
3
3
3
3
3
Tada! Youve found the volume of a sphere (or another portion of a sphere,
if you use a different range for x ).
Think that was hard work? You have no idea. That one-line computation
took Archimedes, one of the greatest geniuses of all time, tremendous effort to
figure out. He had to imagine some spheres, and a cylinder, and some cones,
and a fulcrum, and imagine them balancing and. . . lets just say when he found
the formula, he had it written on his grave. Your current intuition would have
saved him incredible effort (see this video).
15.3
74
Now that we have volume, finding surface area is much easier. We can take a
thin peel of the sphere with a shell-by-shell X-Ray:
I imagine the entire shell as powder on the surface of the existing sphere.
How much powder is there? Its dV , the change in volume. Ok, what is the area
the powder covers?
Hrm. Think of a similar question: how much area will a bag of mulch cover?
Get the volume, divide by the desired thickness, and you have the area covered.
If I give you 300 cubic inches of dirt, and spread it in a pile 2 inches thick, the
pile will cover 150 square inches. After all, if Area Thickness = Volume then
ume
Area = TVhiolckness
.
In our case, dV is the volume of the shell, and d r is its thickness. We can
spread dV along the thickness were considering (d r ) and see how much area
we added: dV
d r , the derivative.
This is where the right notation comes in handy. We can think of the
derivative as an abstract, instantaneous rate of change (V 0 ), or as a specific
ratio ( dV
d r ). In this case, we want to consider the individual elements, and how
they interact (volume of shell / thickness of shell).
So, given the relation,
Area of shell =
Volume of shell dV
=
Depth of shell
dr
we figure out:
d
d 4 3 4 d 3 4
Volume =
r = r = (3r 2 ) = 4r 2
dr
dr 3
3 dr
3
Wow, that was fast! The order of our morph (Circumference Area
Volume Surface area) made the last step simple. We could try to spin a
circumference into surface area directly, but its more complex.
As we cranked through this formula, we dropped the exponent on r 3 to
get 3r 2 . Remember the total change comes from 3 perspectives that contribute
an equal share: ddr r 3 = r 2 + r 2 + r 2 = 3r 2 .
15.4
75
The steps we worked through took 2000 years of thought to discover, by the
greatest geniuses no less. Calculus is such a broad and breathtaking viewpoint
that its difficult to imagine where it doesnt apply. Its just about using X-Ray
and Time-Lapse vision:
Break things down. In your current situation, whats the next thing that
will happen? And after that? Is there a pattern here? (Getting bigger,
smaller, staying the same.) Is that knowledge useful to you?
Find the source. Youre seeing a bunch of changes what caused them?
If you know the source, can you predict the end-result of all the changes?
Is that prediction helpful?
Were used to analyzing equations, but I hope it doesnt stop there. Numbers
can describe mood, spiciness, and customer satisfaction; step-by-step thinking
can describe battle plans and psychological treatment. Equations and geometry
are just nice starting points to analyze. Math isnt about equations, and music
isnt about sheet music they point to the idea inside the notation.
While there are more details for other derivatives, integration techniques,
and how infinity works, you dont need them to start thinking with Calculus.
What you discovered today would have brought a tear to Archimedes eye, and
thats a good enough start for me.
Happy math.
A FTERWORD
In martial arts, a black belt doesnt indicate mastery. It means youre a
competent-enough beginner who can now start learning.
By now, we have a solid intuition for Calculus: it explores patterns with
X-Ray and Time-Lapse viewpoints, shows tradeoffs in how objects are made,
and gives us improved multiplication and division. (These insights are more
than I had after years of classes.)
From here, the path is up to you. An intuitive appreciation is wonderful, and
if you wish to sharpen your understanding, follow the guide in the appendix.
If a curious friend asks What is Calculus all about? and you look forward to
answering, Ive done my job.
Happy math.
Keep In Touch
If youd like clear, simple insights and Calculus and other math topics, join the
newsletter:
http://betterexplained.com/newsletter
76
AFTERWORD
77
79
d
5
d x 3x
Weeks 2-12
Begin a traditional Calculus course1 , such as:
Elementary Calculus: An Infinitesimal Approach by Jerome Keisler (2002).
This book is based on infinitesimals (an alternative to limits, which I like)
and has plenty of practice problems. Available in print or free online.
Calculus Made Easy by Silvanus Thompson (1914). This book follows
the traditional limit approach, and is written in a down-to-earth style.
Available on Project Gutenberg and print.
MIT 1801: Single Variable Calculus. Includes video lectures, assignments,
exams, and solutions. Available free online.
As you go through the traditional course, keep this in mind:
Review the intuitive definition. Rephrase technical definitions in terms
that make sense to you.
Its completely fine to use online tools for help. When stuck, get a hint,
fix your mistakes, and try solving a new problem on your own.
Relate graphs back to shapes. Most courses emphasize graphs and
slopes; convert the concepts to shapes to help visualize them.
Skip limits if you get stuck. Limits (and infinitesimals) were invented
after the majority of Calculus. If you struggle, move on and return later.
Enjoy.
1 Visit http://betterexplained.com/calculus/book for clickable URLs.
80