Proof explanation: Prove that $Vert f(b)-f(a)-f'(a)(b-a) Vertleq sup_xin [a,b] Vert f''(x)VertVert b-aVert^2$ [duplicate]
Clash Royale CLAN TAG#URR8PPP
up vote
1
down vote
favorite
This question already has an answer here:
Prove that $Vert f(b)-f(a)-f'(a)(b-a) Vertleq sup_xin [a,b] Vert f''(x)VertVert b-aVert^2$
1 answer
Two days ago, I asked a question
Prove that $Vert f(b)-f(a)-f'(a)(b-a) Vertleq sup_xin [a,b] Vert f''(x)VertVert b-aVert^2$ but was answered just once. However, I am finding it hard to understand the proof provided.
Please, I'll need thorough explanation or another proof. As to the proof, I don't understand
why triple sum was used and not double.
If we differentiate $g(x)=f(b)-f(x)-f'(x)(b-x)$, what do we get?
I am asking because I find it hard to comprehend the proof. Please, can anyone explain these to me? Alternative proofs are welcome.
Thanks.
real-analysis multivariable-calculus derivatives proof-explanation alternative-proof
marked as duplicate by rtybase, amWhy, Adrian Keister, Stefan4024, José Carlos Santos
StackExchange.ready(function()
if (StackExchange.options.isMobile) return;
$('.dupe-hammer-message-hover:not(.hover-bound)').each(function()
var $hover = $(this).addClass('hover-bound'),
$msg = $hover.siblings('.dupe-hammer-message');
$hover.hover(
function()
$hover.showInfoMessage('',
messageElement: $msg.clone().show(),
transient: false,
position: my: 'bottom left', at: 'top center', offsetTop: -7 ,
dismissable: false,
relativeToBody: true
);
,
function()
StackExchange.helpers.removeMessages();
);
);
);
Aug 21 at 2:02
This question has been asked before and already has an answer. If those answers do not fully address your question, please ask a new question.
add a comment |Â
up vote
1
down vote
favorite
This question already has an answer here:
Prove that $Vert f(b)-f(a)-f'(a)(b-a) Vertleq sup_xin [a,b] Vert f''(x)VertVert b-aVert^2$
1 answer
Two days ago, I asked a question
Prove that $Vert f(b)-f(a)-f'(a)(b-a) Vertleq sup_xin [a,b] Vert f''(x)VertVert b-aVert^2$ but was answered just once. However, I am finding it hard to understand the proof provided.
Please, I'll need thorough explanation or another proof. As to the proof, I don't understand
why triple sum was used and not double.
If we differentiate $g(x)=f(b)-f(x)-f'(x)(b-x)$, what do we get?
I am asking because I find it hard to comprehend the proof. Please, can anyone explain these to me? Alternative proofs are welcome.
Thanks.
real-analysis multivariable-calculus derivatives proof-explanation alternative-proof
marked as duplicate by rtybase, amWhy, Adrian Keister, Stefan4024, José Carlos Santos
StackExchange.ready(function()
if (StackExchange.options.isMobile) return;
$('.dupe-hammer-message-hover:not(.hover-bound)').each(function()
var $hover = $(this).addClass('hover-bound'),
$msg = $hover.siblings('.dupe-hammer-message');
$hover.hover(
function()
$hover.showInfoMessage('',
messageElement: $msg.clone().show(),
transient: false,
position: my: 'bottom left', at: 'top center', offsetTop: -7 ,
dismissable: false,
relativeToBody: true
);
,
function()
StackExchange.helpers.removeMessages();
);
);
);
Aug 21 at 2:02
This question has been asked before and already has an answer. If those answers do not fully address your question, please ask a new question.
Why are you re-asking the same very question? I mentioned your previous question was confusing because of bad notations. And again you have accepted an answer that doesn't take multivariable calculus into account. Why did you accept the answer to the previous question if it wasn't clear to you?
â rtybase
Aug 20 at 17:37
@rtybase: I'm sorry for that!
â Mike
Aug 21 at 2:10
add a comment |Â
up vote
1
down vote
favorite
up vote
1
down vote
favorite
This question already has an answer here:
Prove that $Vert f(b)-f(a)-f'(a)(b-a) Vertleq sup_xin [a,b] Vert f''(x)VertVert b-aVert^2$
1 answer
Two days ago, I asked a question
Prove that $Vert f(b)-f(a)-f'(a)(b-a) Vertleq sup_xin [a,b] Vert f''(x)VertVert b-aVert^2$ but was answered just once. However, I am finding it hard to understand the proof provided.
Please, I'll need thorough explanation or another proof. As to the proof, I don't understand
why triple sum was used and not double.
If we differentiate $g(x)=f(b)-f(x)-f'(x)(b-x)$, what do we get?
I am asking because I find it hard to comprehend the proof. Please, can anyone explain these to me? Alternative proofs are welcome.
Thanks.
real-analysis multivariable-calculus derivatives proof-explanation alternative-proof
This question already has an answer here:
Prove that $Vert f(b)-f(a)-f'(a)(b-a) Vertleq sup_xin [a,b] Vert f''(x)VertVert b-aVert^2$
1 answer
Two days ago, I asked a question
Prove that $Vert f(b)-f(a)-f'(a)(b-a) Vertleq sup_xin [a,b] Vert f''(x)VertVert b-aVert^2$ but was answered just once. However, I am finding it hard to understand the proof provided.
Please, I'll need thorough explanation or another proof. As to the proof, I don't understand
why triple sum was used and not double.
If we differentiate $g(x)=f(b)-f(x)-f'(x)(b-x)$, what do we get?
I am asking because I find it hard to comprehend the proof. Please, can anyone explain these to me? Alternative proofs are welcome.
Thanks.
This question already has an answer here:
Prove that $Vert f(b)-f(a)-f'(a)(b-a) Vertleq sup_xin [a,b] Vert f''(x)VertVert b-aVert^2$
1 answer
real-analysis multivariable-calculus derivatives proof-explanation alternative-proof
asked Aug 20 at 13:29
Mike
75615
75615
marked as duplicate by rtybase, amWhy, Adrian Keister, Stefan4024, José Carlos Santos
StackExchange.ready(function()
if (StackExchange.options.isMobile) return;
$('.dupe-hammer-message-hover:not(.hover-bound)').each(function()
var $hover = $(this).addClass('hover-bound'),
$msg = $hover.siblings('.dupe-hammer-message');
$hover.hover(
function()
$hover.showInfoMessage('',
messageElement: $msg.clone().show(),
transient: false,
position: my: 'bottom left', at: 'top center', offsetTop: -7 ,
dismissable: false,
relativeToBody: true
);
,
function()
StackExchange.helpers.removeMessages();
);
);
);
Aug 21 at 2:02
This question has been asked before and already has an answer. If those answers do not fully address your question, please ask a new question.
marked as duplicate by rtybase, amWhy, Adrian Keister, Stefan4024, José Carlos Santos
StackExchange.ready(function()
if (StackExchange.options.isMobile) return;
$('.dupe-hammer-message-hover:not(.hover-bound)').each(function()
var $hover = $(this).addClass('hover-bound'),
$msg = $hover.siblings('.dupe-hammer-message');
$hover.hover(
function()
$hover.showInfoMessage('',
messageElement: $msg.clone().show(),
transient: false,
position: my: 'bottom left', at: 'top center', offsetTop: -7 ,
dismissable: false,
relativeToBody: true
);
,
function()
StackExchange.helpers.removeMessages();
);
);
);
Aug 21 at 2:02
This question has been asked before and already has an answer. If those answers do not fully address your question, please ask a new question.
Why are you re-asking the same very question? I mentioned your previous question was confusing because of bad notations. And again you have accepted an answer that doesn't take multivariable calculus into account. Why did you accept the answer to the previous question if it wasn't clear to you?
â rtybase
Aug 20 at 17:37
@rtybase: I'm sorry for that!
â Mike
Aug 21 at 2:10
add a comment |Â
Why are you re-asking the same very question? I mentioned your previous question was confusing because of bad notations. And again you have accepted an answer that doesn't take multivariable calculus into account. Why did you accept the answer to the previous question if it wasn't clear to you?
â rtybase
Aug 20 at 17:37
@rtybase: I'm sorry for that!
â Mike
Aug 21 at 2:10
Why are you re-asking the same very question? I mentioned your previous question was confusing because of bad notations. And again you have accepted an answer that doesn't take multivariable calculus into account. Why did you accept the answer to the previous question if it wasn't clear to you?
â rtybase
Aug 20 at 17:37
Why are you re-asking the same very question? I mentioned your previous question was confusing because of bad notations. And again you have accepted an answer that doesn't take multivariable calculus into account. Why did you accept the answer to the previous question if it wasn't clear to you?
â rtybase
Aug 20 at 17:37
@rtybase: I'm sorry for that!
â Mike
Aug 21 at 2:10
@rtybase: I'm sorry for that!
â Mike
Aug 21 at 2:10
add a comment |Â
1 Answer
1
active
oldest
votes
up vote
1
down vote
accepted
Recall Taylor's formula for $gcolon[0,1]rightarrowmathbbR^m$ twice differentiable
$$
g(1)=g(0)+g'(0)+int_0^1g^primeprime(s)(1-s)mathrmds;
$$
(I will prove this ad hoc bellow). Now apply this to the function $g(t):= f((1-t)a+tb)$ for $tin[0,1]$ to get your answer:
Answer: By the chain rule:
$$
f(b)=f(a)+f^prime(a)(b-a)+int_0^1(1-t)langle a-b,f^primeprime((1-t)a+tb)(a-b)ranglemathrmdt
$$
so that by the triangle inequality for integrals
$$
|f(b)-f(a)-f^prime(a)(b-a)|leq int_0^1 (1-t)|f^primeprime((1-t)a+tb)(b-a)||b-a|mathrmd t\
leq sup_xin[a,b]|f^primeprime(x)(b-a)||b-a|int_0^1 (1-t)mathrmdt\
=frac12sup_xin[a,b]|f^primeprime(x)(b-a)||b-a|
$$
where in the first inequality we applied Cauchy-Schwarz. Now it seems to me that one can get $frac12$ as the best constant here (clearly optimal if $n=1$), but the answer is, in any case, quite irrelevant as on finite dimensional spaces all norms are equivalent and you do not state clearly what is the norm on $mathbbR^ntimes n$ (i.e., where $f^primeprime$ sits). However, let's say that we work with Euclidean (square) norms only. Let $MinmathbbR^ntimes n$ and $xinmathbbR^n$. Then, again by Cauchy-Schwarz,
$$
|Mx|^2=sum_i=1^n (ROW_jMcdot x)^2leq sum_i=1^n |ROW_jM|^2| x|^2=|M|^2|x|^2,
$$
so that we can substitute $M=f^primeprime(a)$, $x=b-a$ to get
$$
|f(b)-f(a)-f^prime(a)(b-a)|leqfrac12sup_xin[a,b]|f^primeprime(x)||b-a|^2.
$$
Proof of Taylor's formula: Let
$$
I=int_0^1dfracmathrmdmathrmds[(1-s)g^prime(s)]mathrmds,
$$
which we compute in two ways. First, by FTC
$$
I=-g^prime(0).
$$
Second, by the product rule and linearity of integration,
$$
I=int_0^1-g^prime(s)mathrmds+int_0^1(1-s)g^primeprime(s)mathrmds=-g(1)+g(0)+int_0^1(1-s)g^primeprime(s)mathrmds.
$$
Minor appendix: As it stands, my proof tackles the case $m=1$; however, it is completely trivial to extend it (though it is not entirely clear how/if the constant suffers; this of course depends on your choices of norms on $mathbbR^n$ and $mathbbR^m$).
Philosophy: This problem is in any case 1-dimensional; the LHS is the first order Taylor polynomial with step $b-a$, so of course it gives an error $o(|b-a|^2)$.
Sorry, if we differentiate beginalignf^prime((1-t)a+tb)(a-b)endalign, won't we arrive at beginalignf^primeprime((1-t)a+tb)(a-b)^2?endalign
â Mike
Aug 20 at 15:46
$(a-b)$ is a vector
â Sobolev
Aug 20 at 15:49
add a comment |Â
1 Answer
1
active
oldest
votes
1 Answer
1
active
oldest
votes
active
oldest
votes
active
oldest
votes
up vote
1
down vote
accepted
Recall Taylor's formula for $gcolon[0,1]rightarrowmathbbR^m$ twice differentiable
$$
g(1)=g(0)+g'(0)+int_0^1g^primeprime(s)(1-s)mathrmds;
$$
(I will prove this ad hoc bellow). Now apply this to the function $g(t):= f((1-t)a+tb)$ for $tin[0,1]$ to get your answer:
Answer: By the chain rule:
$$
f(b)=f(a)+f^prime(a)(b-a)+int_0^1(1-t)langle a-b,f^primeprime((1-t)a+tb)(a-b)ranglemathrmdt
$$
so that by the triangle inequality for integrals
$$
|f(b)-f(a)-f^prime(a)(b-a)|leq int_0^1 (1-t)|f^primeprime((1-t)a+tb)(b-a)||b-a|mathrmd t\
leq sup_xin[a,b]|f^primeprime(x)(b-a)||b-a|int_0^1 (1-t)mathrmdt\
=frac12sup_xin[a,b]|f^primeprime(x)(b-a)||b-a|
$$
where in the first inequality we applied Cauchy-Schwarz. Now it seems to me that one can get $frac12$ as the best constant here (clearly optimal if $n=1$), but the answer is, in any case, quite irrelevant as on finite dimensional spaces all norms are equivalent and you do not state clearly what is the norm on $mathbbR^ntimes n$ (i.e., where $f^primeprime$ sits). However, let's say that we work with Euclidean (square) norms only. Let $MinmathbbR^ntimes n$ and $xinmathbbR^n$. Then, again by Cauchy-Schwarz,
$$
|Mx|^2=sum_i=1^n (ROW_jMcdot x)^2leq sum_i=1^n |ROW_jM|^2| x|^2=|M|^2|x|^2,
$$
so that we can substitute $M=f^primeprime(a)$, $x=b-a$ to get
$$
|f(b)-f(a)-f^prime(a)(b-a)|leqfrac12sup_xin[a,b]|f^primeprime(x)||b-a|^2.
$$
Proof of Taylor's formula: Let
$$
I=int_0^1dfracmathrmdmathrmds[(1-s)g^prime(s)]mathrmds,
$$
which we compute in two ways. First, by FTC
$$
I=-g^prime(0).
$$
Second, by the product rule and linearity of integration,
$$
I=int_0^1-g^prime(s)mathrmds+int_0^1(1-s)g^primeprime(s)mathrmds=-g(1)+g(0)+int_0^1(1-s)g^primeprime(s)mathrmds.
$$
Minor appendix: As it stands, my proof tackles the case $m=1$; however, it is completely trivial to extend it (though it is not entirely clear how/if the constant suffers; this of course depends on your choices of norms on $mathbbR^n$ and $mathbbR^m$).
Philosophy: This problem is in any case 1-dimensional; the LHS is the first order Taylor polynomial with step $b-a$, so of course it gives an error $o(|b-a|^2)$.
Sorry, if we differentiate beginalignf^prime((1-t)a+tb)(a-b)endalign, won't we arrive at beginalignf^primeprime((1-t)a+tb)(a-b)^2?endalign
â Mike
Aug 20 at 15:46
$(a-b)$ is a vector
â Sobolev
Aug 20 at 15:49
add a comment |Â
up vote
1
down vote
accepted
Recall Taylor's formula for $gcolon[0,1]rightarrowmathbbR^m$ twice differentiable
$$
g(1)=g(0)+g'(0)+int_0^1g^primeprime(s)(1-s)mathrmds;
$$
(I will prove this ad hoc bellow). Now apply this to the function $g(t):= f((1-t)a+tb)$ for $tin[0,1]$ to get your answer:
Answer: By the chain rule:
$$
f(b)=f(a)+f^prime(a)(b-a)+int_0^1(1-t)langle a-b,f^primeprime((1-t)a+tb)(a-b)ranglemathrmdt
$$
so that by the triangle inequality for integrals
$$
|f(b)-f(a)-f^prime(a)(b-a)|leq int_0^1 (1-t)|f^primeprime((1-t)a+tb)(b-a)||b-a|mathrmd t\
leq sup_xin[a,b]|f^primeprime(x)(b-a)||b-a|int_0^1 (1-t)mathrmdt\
=frac12sup_xin[a,b]|f^primeprime(x)(b-a)||b-a|
$$
where in the first inequality we applied Cauchy-Schwarz. Now it seems to me that one can get $frac12$ as the best constant here (clearly optimal if $n=1$), but the answer is, in any case, quite irrelevant as on finite dimensional spaces all norms are equivalent and you do not state clearly what is the norm on $mathbbR^ntimes n$ (i.e., where $f^primeprime$ sits). However, let's say that we work with Euclidean (square) norms only. Let $MinmathbbR^ntimes n$ and $xinmathbbR^n$. Then, again by Cauchy-Schwarz,
$$
|Mx|^2=sum_i=1^n (ROW_jMcdot x)^2leq sum_i=1^n |ROW_jM|^2| x|^2=|M|^2|x|^2,
$$
so that we can substitute $M=f^primeprime(a)$, $x=b-a$ to get
$$
|f(b)-f(a)-f^prime(a)(b-a)|leqfrac12sup_xin[a,b]|f^primeprime(x)||b-a|^2.
$$
Proof of Taylor's formula: Let
$$
I=int_0^1dfracmathrmdmathrmds[(1-s)g^prime(s)]mathrmds,
$$
which we compute in two ways. First, by FTC
$$
I=-g^prime(0).
$$
Second, by the product rule and linearity of integration,
$$
I=int_0^1-g^prime(s)mathrmds+int_0^1(1-s)g^primeprime(s)mathrmds=-g(1)+g(0)+int_0^1(1-s)g^primeprime(s)mathrmds.
$$
Minor appendix: As it stands, my proof tackles the case $m=1$; however, it is completely trivial to extend it (though it is not entirely clear how/if the constant suffers; this of course depends on your choices of norms on $mathbbR^n$ and $mathbbR^m$).
Philosophy: This problem is in any case 1-dimensional; the LHS is the first order Taylor polynomial with step $b-a$, so of course it gives an error $o(|b-a|^2)$.
Sorry, if we differentiate beginalignf^prime((1-t)a+tb)(a-b)endalign, won't we arrive at beginalignf^primeprime((1-t)a+tb)(a-b)^2?endalign
â Mike
Aug 20 at 15:46
$(a-b)$ is a vector
â Sobolev
Aug 20 at 15:49
add a comment |Â
up vote
1
down vote
accepted
up vote
1
down vote
accepted
Recall Taylor's formula for $gcolon[0,1]rightarrowmathbbR^m$ twice differentiable
$$
g(1)=g(0)+g'(0)+int_0^1g^primeprime(s)(1-s)mathrmds;
$$
(I will prove this ad hoc bellow). Now apply this to the function $g(t):= f((1-t)a+tb)$ for $tin[0,1]$ to get your answer:
Answer: By the chain rule:
$$
f(b)=f(a)+f^prime(a)(b-a)+int_0^1(1-t)langle a-b,f^primeprime((1-t)a+tb)(a-b)ranglemathrmdt
$$
so that by the triangle inequality for integrals
$$
|f(b)-f(a)-f^prime(a)(b-a)|leq int_0^1 (1-t)|f^primeprime((1-t)a+tb)(b-a)||b-a|mathrmd t\
leq sup_xin[a,b]|f^primeprime(x)(b-a)||b-a|int_0^1 (1-t)mathrmdt\
=frac12sup_xin[a,b]|f^primeprime(x)(b-a)||b-a|
$$
where in the first inequality we applied Cauchy-Schwarz. Now it seems to me that one can get $frac12$ as the best constant here (clearly optimal if $n=1$), but the answer is, in any case, quite irrelevant as on finite dimensional spaces all norms are equivalent and you do not state clearly what is the norm on $mathbbR^ntimes n$ (i.e., where $f^primeprime$ sits). However, let's say that we work with Euclidean (square) norms only. Let $MinmathbbR^ntimes n$ and $xinmathbbR^n$. Then, again by Cauchy-Schwarz,
$$
|Mx|^2=sum_i=1^n (ROW_jMcdot x)^2leq sum_i=1^n |ROW_jM|^2| x|^2=|M|^2|x|^2,
$$
so that we can substitute $M=f^primeprime(a)$, $x=b-a$ to get
$$
|f(b)-f(a)-f^prime(a)(b-a)|leqfrac12sup_xin[a,b]|f^primeprime(x)||b-a|^2.
$$
Proof of Taylor's formula: Let
$$
I=int_0^1dfracmathrmdmathrmds[(1-s)g^prime(s)]mathrmds,
$$
which we compute in two ways. First, by FTC
$$
I=-g^prime(0).
$$
Second, by the product rule and linearity of integration,
$$
I=int_0^1-g^prime(s)mathrmds+int_0^1(1-s)g^primeprime(s)mathrmds=-g(1)+g(0)+int_0^1(1-s)g^primeprime(s)mathrmds.
$$
Minor appendix: As it stands, my proof tackles the case $m=1$; however, it is completely trivial to extend it (though it is not entirely clear how/if the constant suffers; this of course depends on your choices of norms on $mathbbR^n$ and $mathbbR^m$).
Philosophy: This problem is in any case 1-dimensional; the LHS is the first order Taylor polynomial with step $b-a$, so of course it gives an error $o(|b-a|^2)$.
Recall Taylor's formula for $gcolon[0,1]rightarrowmathbbR^m$ twice differentiable
$$
g(1)=g(0)+g'(0)+int_0^1g^primeprime(s)(1-s)mathrmds;
$$
(I will prove this ad hoc bellow). Now apply this to the function $g(t):= f((1-t)a+tb)$ for $tin[0,1]$ to get your answer:
Answer: By the chain rule:
$$
f(b)=f(a)+f^prime(a)(b-a)+int_0^1(1-t)langle a-b,f^primeprime((1-t)a+tb)(a-b)ranglemathrmdt
$$
so that by the triangle inequality for integrals
$$
|f(b)-f(a)-f^prime(a)(b-a)|leq int_0^1 (1-t)|f^primeprime((1-t)a+tb)(b-a)||b-a|mathrmd t\
leq sup_xin[a,b]|f^primeprime(x)(b-a)||b-a|int_0^1 (1-t)mathrmdt\
=frac12sup_xin[a,b]|f^primeprime(x)(b-a)||b-a|
$$
where in the first inequality we applied Cauchy-Schwarz. Now it seems to me that one can get $frac12$ as the best constant here (clearly optimal if $n=1$), but the answer is, in any case, quite irrelevant as on finite dimensional spaces all norms are equivalent and you do not state clearly what is the norm on $mathbbR^ntimes n$ (i.e., where $f^primeprime$ sits). However, let's say that we work with Euclidean (square) norms only. Let $MinmathbbR^ntimes n$ and $xinmathbbR^n$. Then, again by Cauchy-Schwarz,
$$
|Mx|^2=sum_i=1^n (ROW_jMcdot x)^2leq sum_i=1^n |ROW_jM|^2| x|^2=|M|^2|x|^2,
$$
so that we can substitute $M=f^primeprime(a)$, $x=b-a$ to get
$$
|f(b)-f(a)-f^prime(a)(b-a)|leqfrac12sup_xin[a,b]|f^primeprime(x)||b-a|^2.
$$
Proof of Taylor's formula: Let
$$
I=int_0^1dfracmathrmdmathrmds[(1-s)g^prime(s)]mathrmds,
$$
which we compute in two ways. First, by FTC
$$
I=-g^prime(0).
$$
Second, by the product rule and linearity of integration,
$$
I=int_0^1-g^prime(s)mathrmds+int_0^1(1-s)g^primeprime(s)mathrmds=-g(1)+g(0)+int_0^1(1-s)g^primeprime(s)mathrmds.
$$
Minor appendix: As it stands, my proof tackles the case $m=1$; however, it is completely trivial to extend it (though it is not entirely clear how/if the constant suffers; this of course depends on your choices of norms on $mathbbR^n$ and $mathbbR^m$).
Philosophy: This problem is in any case 1-dimensional; the LHS is the first order Taylor polynomial with step $b-a$, so of course it gives an error $o(|b-a|^2)$.
edited Aug 20 at 15:49
answered Aug 20 at 15:05
Sobolev
686
686
Sorry, if we differentiate beginalignf^prime((1-t)a+tb)(a-b)endalign, won't we arrive at beginalignf^primeprime((1-t)a+tb)(a-b)^2?endalign
â Mike
Aug 20 at 15:46
$(a-b)$ is a vector
â Sobolev
Aug 20 at 15:49
add a comment |Â
Sorry, if we differentiate beginalignf^prime((1-t)a+tb)(a-b)endalign, won't we arrive at beginalignf^primeprime((1-t)a+tb)(a-b)^2?endalign
â Mike
Aug 20 at 15:46
$(a-b)$ is a vector
â Sobolev
Aug 20 at 15:49
Sorry, if we differentiate beginalignf^prime((1-t)a+tb)(a-b)endalign, won't we arrive at beginalignf^primeprime((1-t)a+tb)(a-b)^2?endalign
â Mike
Aug 20 at 15:46
Sorry, if we differentiate beginalignf^prime((1-t)a+tb)(a-b)endalign, won't we arrive at beginalignf^primeprime((1-t)a+tb)(a-b)^2?endalign
â Mike
Aug 20 at 15:46
$(a-b)$ is a vector
â Sobolev
Aug 20 at 15:49
$(a-b)$ is a vector
â Sobolev
Aug 20 at 15:49
add a comment |Â
Why are you re-asking the same very question? I mentioned your previous question was confusing because of bad notations. And again you have accepted an answer that doesn't take multivariable calculus into account. Why did you accept the answer to the previous question if it wasn't clear to you?
â rtybase
Aug 20 at 17:37
@rtybase: I'm sorry for that!
â Mike
Aug 21 at 2:10