## So I tried...

For the discussion of math. Duh.

Moderators: gmalivuk, Moderators General, Prelates

yuyuyami
Posts: 10
Joined: Sat Jun 12, 2010 8:16 pm UTC

### So I tried...

I tried to take the derivative of:

Y=O*P*T*I*M*U*S

But the multiplication and chain rules started making it giant. I finished it, but then when I tried to multiply it all together, I realized: Finding (OPTIMUS)' just isn't worth it.

Talith
Proved the Goldbach Conjecture
Posts: 848
Joined: Sat Nov 29, 2008 1:28 am UTC
Location: Manchester - UK

### Re: So I tried...

We have a maths joke thread.

yuyuyami
Posts: 10
Joined: Sat Jun 12, 2010 8:16 pm UTC

### Re: So I tried...

Could a moderator move this, then?

Sizik
Posts: 1243
Joined: Wed Aug 27, 2008 3:48 am UTC

### Re: So I tried...

It's not really that hard.
(OPTIMUS)' = O'PTIMUS + O(PTIMUS)'

Iterating out, you get the following:
(OPTIMUS)' = O'PTIMUS + OP'TIMUS + OPT'IMUS + OPTI'MUS + OPTIM'US + OPTIMU'S + OPTIMUS'
i.e. as many terms as factors, and each term has one factor get derivatified differentiated.

[/nosenseofhumor]
gmalivuk wrote:
King Author wrote:If space (rather, distance) is an illusion, it'd be possible for one meta-me to experience both body's sensory inputs.
Yes. And if wishes were horses, wishing wells would fill up very quickly with drowned horses.

lu6cifer
Posts: 230
Joined: Fri Mar 20, 2009 4:03 am UTC
Location: That state with the all-important stone

### Re: So I tried...

If you found it too unwieldy, you probably should have tried logarithmic differentiation
lu6cifer wrote:"Derive" in place of "differentiate" is even worse.

doogly wrote:I'm partial to "throw some d's on that bitch."

yuyuyami
Posts: 10
Joined: Sat Jun 12, 2010 8:16 pm UTC

### Re: So I tried...

Sizik wrote:It's not really that hard.
(OPTIMUS)' = O'PTIMUS + O(PTIMUS)'

Iterating out, you get the following:
(OPTIMUS)' = O'PTIMUS + OP'TIMUS + OPT'IMUS + OPTI'MUS + OPTIM'US + OPTIMU'S + OPTIMUS'
i.e. as many terms as factors, and each term has one factor get derivatified differentiated.

[/nosenseofhumor]

Wouldn't it be closer to:

Y'=(O'*PTIMUS+(P'*TIMUS+(T'*IMUS+(I'*MUS+(M'*US+(U'*S+S'*U)*M)*I)*T)*P)*O)*(P'*TIMUS+(T'*IMUS+(I'*MUS+(M'*US+(U'*S+S'*U)*M)*I)*T)*P)*(T'*IMUS+(I'*MUS+(M'*US+(U'*S+S'*U)*M)*I)*T)*(I'*MUS+(M'*US+(U'*S+S'*U)*M)*I)*(M'*US+(U'*S+S'*U)*M)*(U'*S+S'*U)

?

Because you still need to take the derivative of the second term when doing the multiplication rule.

Sizik
Posts: 1243
Joined: Wed Aug 27, 2008 3:48 am UTC

### Re: So I tried...

yuyuyami wrote:
Wouldn't it be closer to:

Y'=(O'*PTIMUS+(P'*TIMUS+(T'*IMUS+(I'*MUS+(M'*US+(U'*S+S'*U)*M)*I)*T)*P)*O)*(P'*TIMUS+(T'*IMUS+(I'*MUS+(M'*US+(U'*S+S'*U)*M)*I)*T)*P)*(T'*IMUS+(I'*MUS+(M'*US+(U'*S+S'*U)*M)*I)*T)*(I'*MUS+(M'*US+(U'*S+S'*U)*M)*I)*(M'*US+(U'*S+S'*U)*M)*(U'*S+S'*U)

?

Because you still need to take the derivative of the second term when doing the multiplication rule.

(uv)' = u'v + uv', not (u'v + uv')v', or whatever seems to be going on there. The chain rule doesn't apply for multiplication.

Step by step:
Y' = (OPTIMUS)'
Y' = O'PTIMUS + O(PTIMUS)'
Y' = O'PTIMUS + O(P'TIMUS + P(TIMUS)' )
Y' = O'PTIMUS + O(P'TIMUS + P(T'IMUS + T(IMUS)' ))
Y' = O'PTIMUS + O(P'TIMUS + P(T'IMUS + T(I'MUS + I(MUS)' )))
Y' = O'PTIMUS + O(P'TIMUS + P(T'IMUS + T(I'MUS + I(M'US + M(US)' ))))
Y' = O'PTIMUS + O(P'TIMUS + P(T'IMUS + T(I'MUS + I(M'US + M(U'S + US' )))))
Y' = O'PTIMUS + O(P'TIMUS + P(T'IMUS + T(I'MUS + I(M'US + MU'S + MUS' ))))
Y' = O'PTIMUS + O(P'TIMUS + P(T'IMUS + T(I'MUS + IM'US + IMU'S + IMUS' )))
Y' = O'PTIMUS + O(P'TIMUS + P(T'IMUS + TI'MUS + TIM'US + TIMU'S + TIMUS' ))
Y' = O'PTIMUS + O(P'TIMUS + PT'IMUS + PTI'MUS + PTIM'US + PTIMU'S + PTIMUS' )
Y' = O'PTIMUS + OP'TIMUS + OPT'IMUS + OPTI'MUS + OPTIM'US + OPTIMU'S + OPTIMUS'
gmalivuk wrote:
King Author wrote:If space (rather, distance) is an illusion, it'd be possible for one meta-me to experience both body's sensory inputs.
Yes. And if wishes were horses, wishing wells would fill up very quickly with drowned horses.