What is the purpose or proof behind chain rule?Chain Rule applied to Trig Functionschain rule with manual substitutionchain rule or product ruleHelp understand chain rule derivativeThe chain rule problem with second compositeWhy is the chain rule applied to derivatives of trigonometric functions?Proof involving multivariable chain ruleChain rule to differentiate $sin ^2fracx2$Partial Derivative and Chain RuleDifferentiate without using chain rule in 5 steps

What is "focus distance lower/upper" and how is it different from depth of field?

Is it insecure to send a password in a `curl` command?

What is a ^ b and (a & b) << 1?

Fastest way to pop N items from a large dict

How to deal with taxi scam when on vacation?

My adviser wants to be the first author

Python if-else code style for reduced code for rounding floats

Why Choose Less Effective Armour Types?

Recruiter wants very extensive technical details about all of my previous work

Why do tuner card drivers fail to build after kernel update to 4.4.0-143-generic?

How could a scammer know the apps on my phone / iTunes account?

Why did it take so long to abandon sail after steamships were demonstrated?

How could an airship be repaired midflight?

Aluminum electrolytic or ceramic capacitors for linear regulator input and output?

Is "upgrade" the right word to use in this context?

Is it normal that my co-workers at a fitness company criticize my food choices?

How to write cleanly even if my character uses expletive language?

Have the tides ever turned twice on any open problem?

Meme-controlled people

Why does a Star of David appear at a rally with Francisco Franco?

If I can solve Sudoku, can I solve the Travelling Salesman Problem (TSP)? If so, how?

Is it true that good novels will automatically sell themselves on Amazon (and so on) and there is no need for one to waste time promoting?

What is the Japanese sound word for the clinking of money?

Print a physical multiplication table



What is the purpose or proof behind chain rule?


Chain Rule applied to Trig Functionschain rule with manual substitutionchain rule or product ruleHelp understand chain rule derivativeThe chain rule problem with second compositeWhy is the chain rule applied to derivatives of trigonometric functions?Proof involving multivariable chain ruleChain rule to differentiate $sin ^2fracx2$Partial Derivative and Chain RuleDifferentiate without using chain rule in 5 steps













2












$begingroup$


For example, take a function $sin x$. The derivative of this function is $cos x$.



The chain rule states that $fracddx (f(g(x)))$ is $fracddx g(x) fracddx (f(g(x)))$. Again going back to the example above, now instead of $sin x$ lets take $sin 2x$.



Differentiating it without chain rule, we get $cos 2x$. However, using chain rule, we get $2cos 2x$.



So now the problem is that I don't see the purpose behind the chain rule. Why should $sin 2x$ be $2cos 2x$?



Is there any proof behind this chain rule? I really need to know as I getting many questions wromg without using the chain rule.










share|cite|improve this question









$endgroup$







  • 1




    $begingroup$
    " Why should $sin 2x;$ be $;2cos 2x$?" No, it isn't: its derivative is. Why? Because that's what we get from theorems or from the definition of derivative as limit. That's all. And yes: of course there is proof of the chain rule: any decent calculus book includes it.
    $endgroup$
    – DonAntonio
    1 hour ago











  • $begingroup$
    In your post, when you are 'differentiating without chain rule', you are differentiating $sin 2x$ with respect to $2x$, rather than with respect to $x$.
    $endgroup$
    – Minus One-Twelfth
    1 hour ago











  • $begingroup$
    @DonAntonio what i meant was derivative. I was just writing that in short. U shoukd be able to understand that as this whole post is about derivative
    $endgroup$
    – rash
    1 hour ago










  • $begingroup$
    @MinusOne-Twelfth whether i am taking with respect to 2x or x, the derivative value isnt the same and thats my confusion. For example derivative of $sin 2x$ where $piover 2$. Differentiating with respect to 2x is -1 & with respect to x is -2. Why?
    $endgroup$
    – rash
    59 mins ago







  • 1




    $begingroup$
    @littleO I didnt say it was correct. It is just my confusion of why should it not be like that and should be $2cos x$
    $endgroup$
    – rash
    58 mins ago
















2












$begingroup$


For example, take a function $sin x$. The derivative of this function is $cos x$.



The chain rule states that $fracddx (f(g(x)))$ is $fracddx g(x) fracddx (f(g(x)))$. Again going back to the example above, now instead of $sin x$ lets take $sin 2x$.



Differentiating it without chain rule, we get $cos 2x$. However, using chain rule, we get $2cos 2x$.



So now the problem is that I don't see the purpose behind the chain rule. Why should $sin 2x$ be $2cos 2x$?



Is there any proof behind this chain rule? I really need to know as I getting many questions wromg without using the chain rule.










share|cite|improve this question









$endgroup$







  • 1




    $begingroup$
    " Why should $sin 2x;$ be $;2cos 2x$?" No, it isn't: its derivative is. Why? Because that's what we get from theorems or from the definition of derivative as limit. That's all. And yes: of course there is proof of the chain rule: any decent calculus book includes it.
    $endgroup$
    – DonAntonio
    1 hour ago











  • $begingroup$
    In your post, when you are 'differentiating without chain rule', you are differentiating $sin 2x$ with respect to $2x$, rather than with respect to $x$.
    $endgroup$
    – Minus One-Twelfth
    1 hour ago











  • $begingroup$
    @DonAntonio what i meant was derivative. I was just writing that in short. U shoukd be able to understand that as this whole post is about derivative
    $endgroup$
    – rash
    1 hour ago










  • $begingroup$
    @MinusOne-Twelfth whether i am taking with respect to 2x or x, the derivative value isnt the same and thats my confusion. For example derivative of $sin 2x$ where $piover 2$. Differentiating with respect to 2x is -1 & with respect to x is -2. Why?
    $endgroup$
    – rash
    59 mins ago







  • 1




    $begingroup$
    @littleO I didnt say it was correct. It is just my confusion of why should it not be like that and should be $2cos x$
    $endgroup$
    – rash
    58 mins ago














2












2








2


1



$begingroup$


For example, take a function $sin x$. The derivative of this function is $cos x$.



The chain rule states that $fracddx (f(g(x)))$ is $fracddx g(x) fracddx (f(g(x)))$. Again going back to the example above, now instead of $sin x$ lets take $sin 2x$.



Differentiating it without chain rule, we get $cos 2x$. However, using chain rule, we get $2cos 2x$.



So now the problem is that I don't see the purpose behind the chain rule. Why should $sin 2x$ be $2cos 2x$?



Is there any proof behind this chain rule? I really need to know as I getting many questions wromg without using the chain rule.










share|cite|improve this question









$endgroup$




For example, take a function $sin x$. The derivative of this function is $cos x$.



The chain rule states that $fracddx (f(g(x)))$ is $fracddx g(x) fracddx (f(g(x)))$. Again going back to the example above, now instead of $sin x$ lets take $sin 2x$.



Differentiating it without chain rule, we get $cos 2x$. However, using chain rule, we get $2cos 2x$.



So now the problem is that I don't see the purpose behind the chain rule. Why should $sin 2x$ be $2cos 2x$?



Is there any proof behind this chain rule? I really need to know as I getting many questions wromg without using the chain rule.







calculus derivatives soft-question






share|cite|improve this question













share|cite|improve this question











share|cite|improve this question




share|cite|improve this question










asked 1 hour ago









rashrash

49214




49214







  • 1




    $begingroup$
    " Why should $sin 2x;$ be $;2cos 2x$?" No, it isn't: its derivative is. Why? Because that's what we get from theorems or from the definition of derivative as limit. That's all. And yes: of course there is proof of the chain rule: any decent calculus book includes it.
    $endgroup$
    – DonAntonio
    1 hour ago











  • $begingroup$
    In your post, when you are 'differentiating without chain rule', you are differentiating $sin 2x$ with respect to $2x$, rather than with respect to $x$.
    $endgroup$
    – Minus One-Twelfth
    1 hour ago











  • $begingroup$
    @DonAntonio what i meant was derivative. I was just writing that in short. U shoukd be able to understand that as this whole post is about derivative
    $endgroup$
    – rash
    1 hour ago










  • $begingroup$
    @MinusOne-Twelfth whether i am taking with respect to 2x or x, the derivative value isnt the same and thats my confusion. For example derivative of $sin 2x$ where $piover 2$. Differentiating with respect to 2x is -1 & with respect to x is -2. Why?
    $endgroup$
    – rash
    59 mins ago







  • 1




    $begingroup$
    @littleO I didnt say it was correct. It is just my confusion of why should it not be like that and should be $2cos x$
    $endgroup$
    – rash
    58 mins ago













  • 1




    $begingroup$
    " Why should $sin 2x;$ be $;2cos 2x$?" No, it isn't: its derivative is. Why? Because that's what we get from theorems or from the definition of derivative as limit. That's all. And yes: of course there is proof of the chain rule: any decent calculus book includes it.
    $endgroup$
    – DonAntonio
    1 hour ago











  • $begingroup$
    In your post, when you are 'differentiating without chain rule', you are differentiating $sin 2x$ with respect to $2x$, rather than with respect to $x$.
    $endgroup$
    – Minus One-Twelfth
    1 hour ago











  • $begingroup$
    @DonAntonio what i meant was derivative. I was just writing that in short. U shoukd be able to understand that as this whole post is about derivative
    $endgroup$
    – rash
    1 hour ago










  • $begingroup$
    @MinusOne-Twelfth whether i am taking with respect to 2x or x, the derivative value isnt the same and thats my confusion. For example derivative of $sin 2x$ where $piover 2$. Differentiating with respect to 2x is -1 & with respect to x is -2. Why?
    $endgroup$
    – rash
    59 mins ago







  • 1




    $begingroup$
    @littleO I didnt say it was correct. It is just my confusion of why should it not be like that and should be $2cos x$
    $endgroup$
    – rash
    58 mins ago








1




1




$begingroup$
" Why should $sin 2x;$ be $;2cos 2x$?" No, it isn't: its derivative is. Why? Because that's what we get from theorems or from the definition of derivative as limit. That's all. And yes: of course there is proof of the chain rule: any decent calculus book includes it.
$endgroup$
– DonAntonio
1 hour ago





$begingroup$
" Why should $sin 2x;$ be $;2cos 2x$?" No, it isn't: its derivative is. Why? Because that's what we get from theorems or from the definition of derivative as limit. That's all. And yes: of course there is proof of the chain rule: any decent calculus book includes it.
$endgroup$
– DonAntonio
1 hour ago













$begingroup$
In your post, when you are 'differentiating without chain rule', you are differentiating $sin 2x$ with respect to $2x$, rather than with respect to $x$.
$endgroup$
– Minus One-Twelfth
1 hour ago





$begingroup$
In your post, when you are 'differentiating without chain rule', you are differentiating $sin 2x$ with respect to $2x$, rather than with respect to $x$.
$endgroup$
– Minus One-Twelfth
1 hour ago













$begingroup$
@DonAntonio what i meant was derivative. I was just writing that in short. U shoukd be able to understand that as this whole post is about derivative
$endgroup$
– rash
1 hour ago




$begingroup$
@DonAntonio what i meant was derivative. I was just writing that in short. U shoukd be able to understand that as this whole post is about derivative
$endgroup$
– rash
1 hour ago












$begingroup$
@MinusOne-Twelfth whether i am taking with respect to 2x or x, the derivative value isnt the same and thats my confusion. For example derivative of $sin 2x$ where $piover 2$. Differentiating with respect to 2x is -1 & with respect to x is -2. Why?
$endgroup$
– rash
59 mins ago





$begingroup$
@MinusOne-Twelfth whether i am taking with respect to 2x or x, the derivative value isnt the same and thats my confusion. For example derivative of $sin 2x$ where $piover 2$. Differentiating with respect to 2x is -1 & with respect to x is -2. Why?
$endgroup$
– rash
59 mins ago





1




1




$begingroup$
@littleO I didnt say it was correct. It is just my confusion of why should it not be like that and should be $2cos x$
$endgroup$
– rash
58 mins ago





$begingroup$
@littleO I didnt say it was correct. It is just my confusion of why should it not be like that and should be $2cos x$
$endgroup$
– rash
58 mins ago











4 Answers
4






active

oldest

votes


















2












$begingroup$

This is a good question in my opinion. WHY is the chain rule right?
My quick answer is that you are using the chain rule already without knowing it in the product rule, power rule, ect:
$$
fracddxx^n = nx^n-1cdot fracddxx = nx^n-1
$$

So when you differentiate $sin x$ you are actually doing $cos x cdot x' = cos x$.
For a more detailed answer, lets look at the definition of the derivative.



$$
F'(x) = lim_yrightarrow xfracF(x)-F(y)x-y
$$

so let $F(x) = f(g(x))$ and what do we get?
$$
F'(x) = lim_yrightarrow xfracf(g(x)) - f(g(y))x-y
$$

which we can't evaluate. Let us assume that $g(x) ne g(y)$ when $x$ is 'close' to $y$, then we can multiply the whole thing by 1 to get the product of two derivatives:
$$
F'(x) = lim_yrightarrow xfracf(g(x)) - f(g(y))g(x)-g(y)cdot lim_yrightarrow x fracg(x)-g(y)x-y = f'(g(x))g'(x)
$$

where if we want to be picky we can consider $g(x)=g(y)$ too.



(What follows is quite informal) The chain rule actually says something fundamental about composition. We can think of the function $g(x)$ as 'stretching' or 'shrinking' the domain of $f$. When we differentiate we are differentiating with respect to $f$ under an 'unstretched' domain and must correct for our error by multiplying by the derivative of $g$ which is a measure of how severely the domain was stretched. This is why the power rule ect. do not seem to use the chain rule, the domain is unstretched, so our derivative doesn't need to be corrected at all!



For your example of $sin 2x$ lets think about what is going on, we are essentially squeezing $sin x$ in the $x$ direction. But this will make the slope of the sine function increase in a predictable way, in fact the slope at every point of this squeezed graph is twice as big as the original sine graph, exactly as predicted by the chain rule!



For more complicated $g(x)$ the chain rule measures the rate at which the domain is changing from $x$ at every point to make the derivative correct.






share|cite|improve this answer











$endgroup$




















    1












    $begingroup$

    Visually, the derivative is the slope of the tangent line, and the derivative allows us to take a nonlinear function $f$ and approximate it locally with a linear function (that is, a function whose graph is a straight line). In other words, if we know the value of $f(x)$, we can approximate the value of $f$ at a nearby point $x + Delta x$ as follows:
    $$
    tag1 f(x + Delta x) approx f(x) + f'(x) Delta x.
    $$



    Now suppose that $f(x) = g(h(x))$. Then we can approximate $f(x + Delta x)$ by using the above approximation twice, first with $h$ and then with $g$, as follows:
    beginalign
    f(x + Delta x) &= g(h(x + Delta x)) \
    &approx g(h(x) + h'(x) Delta x) \
    &approx g(h(x)) + g'(h(x)) h'(x) Delta x.
    endalign

    Comparing this result with equation (1), we see that
    $$
    f'(x) = g'(h(x)) h'(x).
    $$



    This is not yet a rigorous proof, but it shows how easy it is to discover the chain rule, and this derivation can be made into a rigorous proof without too much additional effort.






    share|cite|improve this answer









    $endgroup$




















      1












      $begingroup$

      When you said that the differentiation of $sin2x$ is $cos2x$, you didn't actually differentiate $sin 2x$ with respect to $x$, you differentiated it with respect to $2x$. Because the differentiation rule is that
      $$ fracddxsin x = cos x$$



      so, only by replacing ALL $x$ in the formula above can you follow the same rule without breaking it, which is
      $$ fracdd(2x)sin 2x = cos 2x$$



      However, the question isn't asking you to find $fracdd(2x) sin 2x$, it is asking you to find $fracddx sin 2x$. See the difference here?



      Since you differentiated the outer function,$f$, with respect to $2x$, you differentiated it with respect to the inner function because $g(x)=2x$.
      So you actually got $fracdfdg=cos 2x$.
      To get from $fracdfdg$ to $fracdfdx$, you just need to multiply by $fracdgdx$ because:
      $$fracdfdgtimesfracdgdx = fracdfdx $$
      after cancelling out the $dg$.
      In this problem, $fracdgdx = fracddx2x = 2$.
      That is why you have to mulitply a $2$ to your $cos 2x$.






      share|cite|improve this answer










      New contributor




      Carina Chen is a new contributor to this site. Take care in asking for clarification, commenting, and answering.
      Check out our Code of Conduct.






      $endgroup$












      • $begingroup$
        Great explanation, but I have to mention that "derive" does not mean "differentiate". The words are not interchangable.
        $endgroup$
        – dbx
        37 mins ago










      • $begingroup$
        @dbx thanks for the catch! I've updated it.
        $endgroup$
        – Carina Chen
        35 mins ago


















      0












      $begingroup$

      The purpose of the chain rule is to get the correct value for the derivative. The proof of the chain rule may be found in many places. In case you find the general proof hard to understand, here is a proof of the special case $frac ddxsin2x=2cos2x$.



      Let $f(x)=sin2x$. Then
      $$frac ddxsin2x=f'(x)=lim_hto0fracf(x+h)-f(x)h=lim_hto0fracsin2(x+h)-sin2xh=lim_hto0fracsin(2x+2h)-sin2xh$$$$=lim_hto0fracsin2xcos2h+cos2xsin2h-sin2xh=left(lim_hto0fraccos2h-1hright)sin2x+left(lim_hto0fracsin2hhright)cos2x.$$
      Since
      $$lim_hto0fraccos2h-1h=lim_hto0fraccos2h-12hcdotfrac2hh=0cdot2=0$$
      while
      $$lim_hto0fracsin2hh=lim_hto0fracsin2h2hcdotfrac2hh=1cdot2=2,$$
      this simplifies to
      $$frac ddxsin2x=0cdotsin2x+2cdotcos2x=boxed2cos2x.$$
      Note that, if we let $g(x)=2x$, then
      $$frac2hh=fracg(x+h)-g(x)h.$$






      share|cite









      $endgroup$












        Your Answer





        StackExchange.ifUsing("editor", function ()
        return StackExchange.using("mathjaxEditing", function ()
        StackExchange.MarkdownEditor.creationCallbacks.add(function (editor, postfix)
        StackExchange.mathjaxEditing.prepareWmdForMathJax(editor, postfix, [["$", "$"], ["\\(","\\)"]]);
        );
        );
        , "mathjax-editing");

        StackExchange.ready(function()
        var channelOptions =
        tags: "".split(" "),
        id: "69"
        ;
        initTagRenderer("".split(" "), "".split(" "), channelOptions);

        StackExchange.using("externalEditor", function()
        // Have to fire editor after snippets, if snippets enabled
        if (StackExchange.settings.snippets.snippetsEnabled)
        StackExchange.using("snippets", function()
        createEditor();
        );

        else
        createEditor();

        );

        function createEditor()
        StackExchange.prepareEditor(
        heartbeatType: 'answer',
        autoActivateHeartbeat: false,
        convertImagesToLinks: true,
        noModals: true,
        showLowRepImageUploadWarning: true,
        reputationToPostImages: 10,
        bindNavPrevention: true,
        postfix: "",
        imageUploader:
        brandingHtml: "Powered by u003ca class="icon-imgur-white" href="https://imgur.com/"u003eu003c/au003e",
        contentPolicyHtml: "User contributions licensed under u003ca href="https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-sa/3.0/"u003ecc by-sa 3.0 with attribution requiredu003c/au003e u003ca href="https://stackoverflow.com/legal/content-policy"u003e(content policy)u003c/au003e",
        allowUrls: true
        ,
        noCode: true, onDemand: true,
        discardSelector: ".discard-answer"
        ,immediatelyShowMarkdownHelp:true
        );



        );













        draft saved

        draft discarded


















        StackExchange.ready(
        function ()
        StackExchange.openid.initPostLogin('.new-post-login', 'https%3a%2f%2fmath.stackexchange.com%2fquestions%2f3151008%2fwhat-is-the-purpose-or-proof-behind-chain-rule%23new-answer', 'question_page');

        );

        Post as a guest















        Required, but never shown

























        4 Answers
        4






        active

        oldest

        votes








        4 Answers
        4






        active

        oldest

        votes









        active

        oldest

        votes






        active

        oldest

        votes









        2












        $begingroup$

        This is a good question in my opinion. WHY is the chain rule right?
        My quick answer is that you are using the chain rule already without knowing it in the product rule, power rule, ect:
        $$
        fracddxx^n = nx^n-1cdot fracddxx = nx^n-1
        $$

        So when you differentiate $sin x$ you are actually doing $cos x cdot x' = cos x$.
        For a more detailed answer, lets look at the definition of the derivative.



        $$
        F'(x) = lim_yrightarrow xfracF(x)-F(y)x-y
        $$

        so let $F(x) = f(g(x))$ and what do we get?
        $$
        F'(x) = lim_yrightarrow xfracf(g(x)) - f(g(y))x-y
        $$

        which we can't evaluate. Let us assume that $g(x) ne g(y)$ when $x$ is 'close' to $y$, then we can multiply the whole thing by 1 to get the product of two derivatives:
        $$
        F'(x) = lim_yrightarrow xfracf(g(x)) - f(g(y))g(x)-g(y)cdot lim_yrightarrow x fracg(x)-g(y)x-y = f'(g(x))g'(x)
        $$

        where if we want to be picky we can consider $g(x)=g(y)$ too.



        (What follows is quite informal) The chain rule actually says something fundamental about composition. We can think of the function $g(x)$ as 'stretching' or 'shrinking' the domain of $f$. When we differentiate we are differentiating with respect to $f$ under an 'unstretched' domain and must correct for our error by multiplying by the derivative of $g$ which is a measure of how severely the domain was stretched. This is why the power rule ect. do not seem to use the chain rule, the domain is unstretched, so our derivative doesn't need to be corrected at all!



        For your example of $sin 2x$ lets think about what is going on, we are essentially squeezing $sin x$ in the $x$ direction. But this will make the slope of the sine function increase in a predictable way, in fact the slope at every point of this squeezed graph is twice as big as the original sine graph, exactly as predicted by the chain rule!



        For more complicated $g(x)$ the chain rule measures the rate at which the domain is changing from $x$ at every point to make the derivative correct.






        share|cite|improve this answer











        $endgroup$

















          2












          $begingroup$

          This is a good question in my opinion. WHY is the chain rule right?
          My quick answer is that you are using the chain rule already without knowing it in the product rule, power rule, ect:
          $$
          fracddxx^n = nx^n-1cdot fracddxx = nx^n-1
          $$

          So when you differentiate $sin x$ you are actually doing $cos x cdot x' = cos x$.
          For a more detailed answer, lets look at the definition of the derivative.



          $$
          F'(x) = lim_yrightarrow xfracF(x)-F(y)x-y
          $$

          so let $F(x) = f(g(x))$ and what do we get?
          $$
          F'(x) = lim_yrightarrow xfracf(g(x)) - f(g(y))x-y
          $$

          which we can't evaluate. Let us assume that $g(x) ne g(y)$ when $x$ is 'close' to $y$, then we can multiply the whole thing by 1 to get the product of two derivatives:
          $$
          F'(x) = lim_yrightarrow xfracf(g(x)) - f(g(y))g(x)-g(y)cdot lim_yrightarrow x fracg(x)-g(y)x-y = f'(g(x))g'(x)
          $$

          where if we want to be picky we can consider $g(x)=g(y)$ too.



          (What follows is quite informal) The chain rule actually says something fundamental about composition. We can think of the function $g(x)$ as 'stretching' or 'shrinking' the domain of $f$. When we differentiate we are differentiating with respect to $f$ under an 'unstretched' domain and must correct for our error by multiplying by the derivative of $g$ which is a measure of how severely the domain was stretched. This is why the power rule ect. do not seem to use the chain rule, the domain is unstretched, so our derivative doesn't need to be corrected at all!



          For your example of $sin 2x$ lets think about what is going on, we are essentially squeezing $sin x$ in the $x$ direction. But this will make the slope of the sine function increase in a predictable way, in fact the slope at every point of this squeezed graph is twice as big as the original sine graph, exactly as predicted by the chain rule!



          For more complicated $g(x)$ the chain rule measures the rate at which the domain is changing from $x$ at every point to make the derivative correct.






          share|cite|improve this answer











          $endgroup$















            2












            2








            2





            $begingroup$

            This is a good question in my opinion. WHY is the chain rule right?
            My quick answer is that you are using the chain rule already without knowing it in the product rule, power rule, ect:
            $$
            fracddxx^n = nx^n-1cdot fracddxx = nx^n-1
            $$

            So when you differentiate $sin x$ you are actually doing $cos x cdot x' = cos x$.
            For a more detailed answer, lets look at the definition of the derivative.



            $$
            F'(x) = lim_yrightarrow xfracF(x)-F(y)x-y
            $$

            so let $F(x) = f(g(x))$ and what do we get?
            $$
            F'(x) = lim_yrightarrow xfracf(g(x)) - f(g(y))x-y
            $$

            which we can't evaluate. Let us assume that $g(x) ne g(y)$ when $x$ is 'close' to $y$, then we can multiply the whole thing by 1 to get the product of two derivatives:
            $$
            F'(x) = lim_yrightarrow xfracf(g(x)) - f(g(y))g(x)-g(y)cdot lim_yrightarrow x fracg(x)-g(y)x-y = f'(g(x))g'(x)
            $$

            where if we want to be picky we can consider $g(x)=g(y)$ too.



            (What follows is quite informal) The chain rule actually says something fundamental about composition. We can think of the function $g(x)$ as 'stretching' or 'shrinking' the domain of $f$. When we differentiate we are differentiating with respect to $f$ under an 'unstretched' domain and must correct for our error by multiplying by the derivative of $g$ which is a measure of how severely the domain was stretched. This is why the power rule ect. do not seem to use the chain rule, the domain is unstretched, so our derivative doesn't need to be corrected at all!



            For your example of $sin 2x$ lets think about what is going on, we are essentially squeezing $sin x$ in the $x$ direction. But this will make the slope of the sine function increase in a predictable way, in fact the slope at every point of this squeezed graph is twice as big as the original sine graph, exactly as predicted by the chain rule!



            For more complicated $g(x)$ the chain rule measures the rate at which the domain is changing from $x$ at every point to make the derivative correct.






            share|cite|improve this answer











            $endgroup$



            This is a good question in my opinion. WHY is the chain rule right?
            My quick answer is that you are using the chain rule already without knowing it in the product rule, power rule, ect:
            $$
            fracddxx^n = nx^n-1cdot fracddxx = nx^n-1
            $$

            So when you differentiate $sin x$ you are actually doing $cos x cdot x' = cos x$.
            For a more detailed answer, lets look at the definition of the derivative.



            $$
            F'(x) = lim_yrightarrow xfracF(x)-F(y)x-y
            $$

            so let $F(x) = f(g(x))$ and what do we get?
            $$
            F'(x) = lim_yrightarrow xfracf(g(x)) - f(g(y))x-y
            $$

            which we can't evaluate. Let us assume that $g(x) ne g(y)$ when $x$ is 'close' to $y$, then we can multiply the whole thing by 1 to get the product of two derivatives:
            $$
            F'(x) = lim_yrightarrow xfracf(g(x)) - f(g(y))g(x)-g(y)cdot lim_yrightarrow x fracg(x)-g(y)x-y = f'(g(x))g'(x)
            $$

            where if we want to be picky we can consider $g(x)=g(y)$ too.



            (What follows is quite informal) The chain rule actually says something fundamental about composition. We can think of the function $g(x)$ as 'stretching' or 'shrinking' the domain of $f$. When we differentiate we are differentiating with respect to $f$ under an 'unstretched' domain and must correct for our error by multiplying by the derivative of $g$ which is a measure of how severely the domain was stretched. This is why the power rule ect. do not seem to use the chain rule, the domain is unstretched, so our derivative doesn't need to be corrected at all!



            For your example of $sin 2x$ lets think about what is going on, we are essentially squeezing $sin x$ in the $x$ direction. But this will make the slope of the sine function increase in a predictable way, in fact the slope at every point of this squeezed graph is twice as big as the original sine graph, exactly as predicted by the chain rule!



            For more complicated $g(x)$ the chain rule measures the rate at which the domain is changing from $x$ at every point to make the derivative correct.







            share|cite|improve this answer














            share|cite|improve this answer



            share|cite|improve this answer








            edited 31 mins ago

























            answered 36 mins ago









            Kyle CKyle C

            564




            564





















                1












                $begingroup$

                Visually, the derivative is the slope of the tangent line, and the derivative allows us to take a nonlinear function $f$ and approximate it locally with a linear function (that is, a function whose graph is a straight line). In other words, if we know the value of $f(x)$, we can approximate the value of $f$ at a nearby point $x + Delta x$ as follows:
                $$
                tag1 f(x + Delta x) approx f(x) + f'(x) Delta x.
                $$



                Now suppose that $f(x) = g(h(x))$. Then we can approximate $f(x + Delta x)$ by using the above approximation twice, first with $h$ and then with $g$, as follows:
                beginalign
                f(x + Delta x) &= g(h(x + Delta x)) \
                &approx g(h(x) + h'(x) Delta x) \
                &approx g(h(x)) + g'(h(x)) h'(x) Delta x.
                endalign

                Comparing this result with equation (1), we see that
                $$
                f'(x) = g'(h(x)) h'(x).
                $$



                This is not yet a rigorous proof, but it shows how easy it is to discover the chain rule, and this derivation can be made into a rigorous proof without too much additional effort.






                share|cite|improve this answer









                $endgroup$

















                  1












                  $begingroup$

                  Visually, the derivative is the slope of the tangent line, and the derivative allows us to take a nonlinear function $f$ and approximate it locally with a linear function (that is, a function whose graph is a straight line). In other words, if we know the value of $f(x)$, we can approximate the value of $f$ at a nearby point $x + Delta x$ as follows:
                  $$
                  tag1 f(x + Delta x) approx f(x) + f'(x) Delta x.
                  $$



                  Now suppose that $f(x) = g(h(x))$. Then we can approximate $f(x + Delta x)$ by using the above approximation twice, first with $h$ and then with $g$, as follows:
                  beginalign
                  f(x + Delta x) &= g(h(x + Delta x)) \
                  &approx g(h(x) + h'(x) Delta x) \
                  &approx g(h(x)) + g'(h(x)) h'(x) Delta x.
                  endalign

                  Comparing this result with equation (1), we see that
                  $$
                  f'(x) = g'(h(x)) h'(x).
                  $$



                  This is not yet a rigorous proof, but it shows how easy it is to discover the chain rule, and this derivation can be made into a rigorous proof without too much additional effort.






                  share|cite|improve this answer









                  $endgroup$















                    1












                    1








                    1





                    $begingroup$

                    Visually, the derivative is the slope of the tangent line, and the derivative allows us to take a nonlinear function $f$ and approximate it locally with a linear function (that is, a function whose graph is a straight line). In other words, if we know the value of $f(x)$, we can approximate the value of $f$ at a nearby point $x + Delta x$ as follows:
                    $$
                    tag1 f(x + Delta x) approx f(x) + f'(x) Delta x.
                    $$



                    Now suppose that $f(x) = g(h(x))$. Then we can approximate $f(x + Delta x)$ by using the above approximation twice, first with $h$ and then with $g$, as follows:
                    beginalign
                    f(x + Delta x) &= g(h(x + Delta x)) \
                    &approx g(h(x) + h'(x) Delta x) \
                    &approx g(h(x)) + g'(h(x)) h'(x) Delta x.
                    endalign

                    Comparing this result with equation (1), we see that
                    $$
                    f'(x) = g'(h(x)) h'(x).
                    $$



                    This is not yet a rigorous proof, but it shows how easy it is to discover the chain rule, and this derivation can be made into a rigorous proof without too much additional effort.






                    share|cite|improve this answer









                    $endgroup$



                    Visually, the derivative is the slope of the tangent line, and the derivative allows us to take a nonlinear function $f$ and approximate it locally with a linear function (that is, a function whose graph is a straight line). In other words, if we know the value of $f(x)$, we can approximate the value of $f$ at a nearby point $x + Delta x$ as follows:
                    $$
                    tag1 f(x + Delta x) approx f(x) + f'(x) Delta x.
                    $$



                    Now suppose that $f(x) = g(h(x))$. Then we can approximate $f(x + Delta x)$ by using the above approximation twice, first with $h$ and then with $g$, as follows:
                    beginalign
                    f(x + Delta x) &= g(h(x + Delta x)) \
                    &approx g(h(x) + h'(x) Delta x) \
                    &approx g(h(x)) + g'(h(x)) h'(x) Delta x.
                    endalign

                    Comparing this result with equation (1), we see that
                    $$
                    f'(x) = g'(h(x)) h'(x).
                    $$



                    This is not yet a rigorous proof, but it shows how easy it is to discover the chain rule, and this derivation can be made into a rigorous proof without too much additional effort.







                    share|cite|improve this answer












                    share|cite|improve this answer



                    share|cite|improve this answer










                    answered 43 mins ago









                    littleOlittleO

                    30k647110




                    30k647110





















                        1












                        $begingroup$

                        When you said that the differentiation of $sin2x$ is $cos2x$, you didn't actually differentiate $sin 2x$ with respect to $x$, you differentiated it with respect to $2x$. Because the differentiation rule is that
                        $$ fracddxsin x = cos x$$



                        so, only by replacing ALL $x$ in the formula above can you follow the same rule without breaking it, which is
                        $$ fracdd(2x)sin 2x = cos 2x$$



                        However, the question isn't asking you to find $fracdd(2x) sin 2x$, it is asking you to find $fracddx sin 2x$. See the difference here?



                        Since you differentiated the outer function,$f$, with respect to $2x$, you differentiated it with respect to the inner function because $g(x)=2x$.
                        So you actually got $fracdfdg=cos 2x$.
                        To get from $fracdfdg$ to $fracdfdx$, you just need to multiply by $fracdgdx$ because:
                        $$fracdfdgtimesfracdgdx = fracdfdx $$
                        after cancelling out the $dg$.
                        In this problem, $fracdgdx = fracddx2x = 2$.
                        That is why you have to mulitply a $2$ to your $cos 2x$.






                        share|cite|improve this answer










                        New contributor




                        Carina Chen is a new contributor to this site. Take care in asking for clarification, commenting, and answering.
                        Check out our Code of Conduct.






                        $endgroup$












                        • $begingroup$
                          Great explanation, but I have to mention that "derive" does not mean "differentiate". The words are not interchangable.
                          $endgroup$
                          – dbx
                          37 mins ago










                        • $begingroup$
                          @dbx thanks for the catch! I've updated it.
                          $endgroup$
                          – Carina Chen
                          35 mins ago















                        1












                        $begingroup$

                        When you said that the differentiation of $sin2x$ is $cos2x$, you didn't actually differentiate $sin 2x$ with respect to $x$, you differentiated it with respect to $2x$. Because the differentiation rule is that
                        $$ fracddxsin x = cos x$$



                        so, only by replacing ALL $x$ in the formula above can you follow the same rule without breaking it, which is
                        $$ fracdd(2x)sin 2x = cos 2x$$



                        However, the question isn't asking you to find $fracdd(2x) sin 2x$, it is asking you to find $fracddx sin 2x$. See the difference here?



                        Since you differentiated the outer function,$f$, with respect to $2x$, you differentiated it with respect to the inner function because $g(x)=2x$.
                        So you actually got $fracdfdg=cos 2x$.
                        To get from $fracdfdg$ to $fracdfdx$, you just need to multiply by $fracdgdx$ because:
                        $$fracdfdgtimesfracdgdx = fracdfdx $$
                        after cancelling out the $dg$.
                        In this problem, $fracdgdx = fracddx2x = 2$.
                        That is why you have to mulitply a $2$ to your $cos 2x$.






                        share|cite|improve this answer










                        New contributor




                        Carina Chen is a new contributor to this site. Take care in asking for clarification, commenting, and answering.
                        Check out our Code of Conduct.






                        $endgroup$












                        • $begingroup$
                          Great explanation, but I have to mention that "derive" does not mean "differentiate". The words are not interchangable.
                          $endgroup$
                          – dbx
                          37 mins ago










                        • $begingroup$
                          @dbx thanks for the catch! I've updated it.
                          $endgroup$
                          – Carina Chen
                          35 mins ago













                        1












                        1








                        1





                        $begingroup$

                        When you said that the differentiation of $sin2x$ is $cos2x$, you didn't actually differentiate $sin 2x$ with respect to $x$, you differentiated it with respect to $2x$. Because the differentiation rule is that
                        $$ fracddxsin x = cos x$$



                        so, only by replacing ALL $x$ in the formula above can you follow the same rule without breaking it, which is
                        $$ fracdd(2x)sin 2x = cos 2x$$



                        However, the question isn't asking you to find $fracdd(2x) sin 2x$, it is asking you to find $fracddx sin 2x$. See the difference here?



                        Since you differentiated the outer function,$f$, with respect to $2x$, you differentiated it with respect to the inner function because $g(x)=2x$.
                        So you actually got $fracdfdg=cos 2x$.
                        To get from $fracdfdg$ to $fracdfdx$, you just need to multiply by $fracdgdx$ because:
                        $$fracdfdgtimesfracdgdx = fracdfdx $$
                        after cancelling out the $dg$.
                        In this problem, $fracdgdx = fracddx2x = 2$.
                        That is why you have to mulitply a $2$ to your $cos 2x$.






                        share|cite|improve this answer










                        New contributor




                        Carina Chen is a new contributor to this site. Take care in asking for clarification, commenting, and answering.
                        Check out our Code of Conduct.






                        $endgroup$



                        When you said that the differentiation of $sin2x$ is $cos2x$, you didn't actually differentiate $sin 2x$ with respect to $x$, you differentiated it with respect to $2x$. Because the differentiation rule is that
                        $$ fracddxsin x = cos x$$



                        so, only by replacing ALL $x$ in the formula above can you follow the same rule without breaking it, which is
                        $$ fracdd(2x)sin 2x = cos 2x$$



                        However, the question isn't asking you to find $fracdd(2x) sin 2x$, it is asking you to find $fracddx sin 2x$. See the difference here?



                        Since you differentiated the outer function,$f$, with respect to $2x$, you differentiated it with respect to the inner function because $g(x)=2x$.
                        So you actually got $fracdfdg=cos 2x$.
                        To get from $fracdfdg$ to $fracdfdx$, you just need to multiply by $fracdgdx$ because:
                        $$fracdfdgtimesfracdgdx = fracdfdx $$
                        after cancelling out the $dg$.
                        In this problem, $fracdgdx = fracddx2x = 2$.
                        That is why you have to mulitply a $2$ to your $cos 2x$.







                        share|cite|improve this answer










                        New contributor




                        Carina Chen is a new contributor to this site. Take care in asking for clarification, commenting, and answering.
                        Check out our Code of Conduct.









                        share|cite|improve this answer



                        share|cite|improve this answer








                        edited 35 mins ago





















                        New contributor




                        Carina Chen is a new contributor to this site. Take care in asking for clarification, commenting, and answering.
                        Check out our Code of Conduct.









                        answered 41 mins ago









                        Carina ChenCarina Chen

                        113




                        113




                        New contributor




                        Carina Chen is a new contributor to this site. Take care in asking for clarification, commenting, and answering.
                        Check out our Code of Conduct.





                        New contributor





                        Carina Chen is a new contributor to this site. Take care in asking for clarification, commenting, and answering.
                        Check out our Code of Conduct.






                        Carina Chen is a new contributor to this site. Take care in asking for clarification, commenting, and answering.
                        Check out our Code of Conduct.











                        • $begingroup$
                          Great explanation, but I have to mention that "derive" does not mean "differentiate". The words are not interchangable.
                          $endgroup$
                          – dbx
                          37 mins ago










                        • $begingroup$
                          @dbx thanks for the catch! I've updated it.
                          $endgroup$
                          – Carina Chen
                          35 mins ago
















                        • $begingroup$
                          Great explanation, but I have to mention that "derive" does not mean "differentiate". The words are not interchangable.
                          $endgroup$
                          – dbx
                          37 mins ago










                        • $begingroup$
                          @dbx thanks for the catch! I've updated it.
                          $endgroup$
                          – Carina Chen
                          35 mins ago















                        $begingroup$
                        Great explanation, but I have to mention that "derive" does not mean "differentiate". The words are not interchangable.
                        $endgroup$
                        – dbx
                        37 mins ago




                        $begingroup$
                        Great explanation, but I have to mention that "derive" does not mean "differentiate". The words are not interchangable.
                        $endgroup$
                        – dbx
                        37 mins ago












                        $begingroup$
                        @dbx thanks for the catch! I've updated it.
                        $endgroup$
                        – Carina Chen
                        35 mins ago




                        $begingroup$
                        @dbx thanks for the catch! I've updated it.
                        $endgroup$
                        – Carina Chen
                        35 mins ago











                        0












                        $begingroup$

                        The purpose of the chain rule is to get the correct value for the derivative. The proof of the chain rule may be found in many places. In case you find the general proof hard to understand, here is a proof of the special case $frac ddxsin2x=2cos2x$.



                        Let $f(x)=sin2x$. Then
                        $$frac ddxsin2x=f'(x)=lim_hto0fracf(x+h)-f(x)h=lim_hto0fracsin2(x+h)-sin2xh=lim_hto0fracsin(2x+2h)-sin2xh$$$$=lim_hto0fracsin2xcos2h+cos2xsin2h-sin2xh=left(lim_hto0fraccos2h-1hright)sin2x+left(lim_hto0fracsin2hhright)cos2x.$$
                        Since
                        $$lim_hto0fraccos2h-1h=lim_hto0fraccos2h-12hcdotfrac2hh=0cdot2=0$$
                        while
                        $$lim_hto0fracsin2hh=lim_hto0fracsin2h2hcdotfrac2hh=1cdot2=2,$$
                        this simplifies to
                        $$frac ddxsin2x=0cdotsin2x+2cdotcos2x=boxed2cos2x.$$
                        Note that, if we let $g(x)=2x$, then
                        $$frac2hh=fracg(x+h)-g(x)h.$$






                        share|cite









                        $endgroup$

















                          0












                          $begingroup$

                          The purpose of the chain rule is to get the correct value for the derivative. The proof of the chain rule may be found in many places. In case you find the general proof hard to understand, here is a proof of the special case $frac ddxsin2x=2cos2x$.



                          Let $f(x)=sin2x$. Then
                          $$frac ddxsin2x=f'(x)=lim_hto0fracf(x+h)-f(x)h=lim_hto0fracsin2(x+h)-sin2xh=lim_hto0fracsin(2x+2h)-sin2xh$$$$=lim_hto0fracsin2xcos2h+cos2xsin2h-sin2xh=left(lim_hto0fraccos2h-1hright)sin2x+left(lim_hto0fracsin2hhright)cos2x.$$
                          Since
                          $$lim_hto0fraccos2h-1h=lim_hto0fraccos2h-12hcdotfrac2hh=0cdot2=0$$
                          while
                          $$lim_hto0fracsin2hh=lim_hto0fracsin2h2hcdotfrac2hh=1cdot2=2,$$
                          this simplifies to
                          $$frac ddxsin2x=0cdotsin2x+2cdotcos2x=boxed2cos2x.$$
                          Note that, if we let $g(x)=2x$, then
                          $$frac2hh=fracg(x+h)-g(x)h.$$






                          share|cite









                          $endgroup$















                            0












                            0








                            0





                            $begingroup$

                            The purpose of the chain rule is to get the correct value for the derivative. The proof of the chain rule may be found in many places. In case you find the general proof hard to understand, here is a proof of the special case $frac ddxsin2x=2cos2x$.



                            Let $f(x)=sin2x$. Then
                            $$frac ddxsin2x=f'(x)=lim_hto0fracf(x+h)-f(x)h=lim_hto0fracsin2(x+h)-sin2xh=lim_hto0fracsin(2x+2h)-sin2xh$$$$=lim_hto0fracsin2xcos2h+cos2xsin2h-sin2xh=left(lim_hto0fraccos2h-1hright)sin2x+left(lim_hto0fracsin2hhright)cos2x.$$
                            Since
                            $$lim_hto0fraccos2h-1h=lim_hto0fraccos2h-12hcdotfrac2hh=0cdot2=0$$
                            while
                            $$lim_hto0fracsin2hh=lim_hto0fracsin2h2hcdotfrac2hh=1cdot2=2,$$
                            this simplifies to
                            $$frac ddxsin2x=0cdotsin2x+2cdotcos2x=boxed2cos2x.$$
                            Note that, if we let $g(x)=2x$, then
                            $$frac2hh=fracg(x+h)-g(x)h.$$






                            share|cite









                            $endgroup$



                            The purpose of the chain rule is to get the correct value for the derivative. The proof of the chain rule may be found in many places. In case you find the general proof hard to understand, here is a proof of the special case $frac ddxsin2x=2cos2x$.



                            Let $f(x)=sin2x$. Then
                            $$frac ddxsin2x=f'(x)=lim_hto0fracf(x+h)-f(x)h=lim_hto0fracsin2(x+h)-sin2xh=lim_hto0fracsin(2x+2h)-sin2xh$$$$=lim_hto0fracsin2xcos2h+cos2xsin2h-sin2xh=left(lim_hto0fraccos2h-1hright)sin2x+left(lim_hto0fracsin2hhright)cos2x.$$
                            Since
                            $$lim_hto0fraccos2h-1h=lim_hto0fraccos2h-12hcdotfrac2hh=0cdot2=0$$
                            while
                            $$lim_hto0fracsin2hh=lim_hto0fracsin2h2hcdotfrac2hh=1cdot2=2,$$
                            this simplifies to
                            $$frac ddxsin2x=0cdotsin2x+2cdotcos2x=boxed2cos2x.$$
                            Note that, if we let $g(x)=2x$, then
                            $$frac2hh=fracg(x+h)-g(x)h.$$







                            share|cite












                            share|cite



                            share|cite










                            answered 5 mins ago









                            bofbof

                            52.5k558121




                            52.5k558121



























                                draft saved

                                draft discarded
















































                                Thanks for contributing an answer to Mathematics Stack Exchange!


                                • Please be sure to answer the question. Provide details and share your research!

                                But avoid


                                • Asking for help, clarification, or responding to other answers.

                                • Making statements based on opinion; back them up with references or personal experience.

                                Use MathJax to format equations. MathJax reference.


                                To learn more, see our tips on writing great answers.




                                draft saved


                                draft discarded














                                StackExchange.ready(
                                function ()
                                StackExchange.openid.initPostLogin('.new-post-login', 'https%3a%2f%2fmath.stackexchange.com%2fquestions%2f3151008%2fwhat-is-the-purpose-or-proof-behind-chain-rule%23new-answer', 'question_page');

                                );

                                Post as a guest















                                Required, but never shown





















































                                Required, but never shown














                                Required, but never shown












                                Required, but never shown







                                Required, but never shown

































                                Required, but never shown














                                Required, but never shown












                                Required, but never shown







                                Required, but never shown







                                Popular posts from this blog

                                Are there any AGPL-style licences that require source code modifications to be public? Planned maintenance scheduled April 23, 2019 at 23:30 UTC (7:30pm US/Eastern) Announcing the arrival of Valued Associate #679: Cesar Manara Unicorn Meta Zoo #1: Why another podcast?Force derivative works to be publicAre there any GPL like licenses for Apple App Store?Do you violate the GPL if you provide source code that cannot be compiled?GPL - is it distribution to use libraries in an appliance loaned to customers?Distributing App for free which uses GPL'ed codeModifications of server software under GPL, with web/CLI interfaceDoes using an AGPLv3-licensed library prevent me from dual-licensing my own source code?Can I publish only select code under GPLv3 from a private project?Is there published precedent regarding the scope of covered work that uses AGPL software?If MIT licensed code links to GPL licensed code what should be the license of the resulting binary program?If I use a public API endpoint that has its source code licensed under AGPL in my app, do I need to disclose my source?

                                2013 GY136 Descoberta | Órbita | Referências Menu de navegação«List Of Centaurs and Scattered-Disk Objects»«List of Known Trans-Neptunian Objects»

                                Button changing it's text & action. Good or terrible? The 2019 Stack Overflow Developer Survey Results Are Inchanging text on user mouseoverShould certain functions be “hard to find” for powerusers to discover?Custom liking function - do I need user login?Using different checkbox style for different checkbox behaviorBest Practices: Save and Exit in Software UIInteraction with remote validated formMore efficient UI to progress the user through a complicated process?Designing a popup notice for a gameShould bulk-editing functions be hidden until a table row is selected, or is there a better solution?Is it bad practice to disable (replace) the context menu?