How would one differentiate the following: 2x+3/√(1-2x)

At vero eos et accusamus et iusto odio dignissimos ducimus qui blanditiis praesentium voluptatum deleniti atque corrupti quos dolores et quas molestias excepturi sint occaecati cupiditate non provident, similique sunt in culpa qui officia deserunt mollitia animi, id est laborum et dolorum fuga.
Et harum quidem rerum facilis est et expedita distinctio. Nam libero tempore, cum soluta nobis est eligendi optio cumque nihil impedit quo minus id quod maxime placeat facere possimus, omnis voluptas assumenda est, omnis dolor repellendus.
Itaque earum rerum hic tenetur a sapiente delectus, ut aut reiciendis voluptatibus maiores alias consequatur aut perferendis doloribus asperiores repellat.

Get our expert's

answer on brainly

SEE EXPERT ANSWER

Get your **free** account and access **expert** answers to this

and **thousands** of other questions.

- anonymous

How would one differentiate the following: 2x+3/√(1-2x)

- katieb

I got my questions answered at brainly.com in under 10 minutes. Go to brainly.com now for free help!

Get this expert

answer on brainly

SEE EXPERT ANSWER

Get your **free** account and access **expert** answers to this

and **thousands** of other questions

- anonymous

You can use the quotient rule.

- anonymous

Are you familiar with that?

- anonymous

yes I am familiar with this

Looking for something else?

Not the answer you are looking for? Search for more explanations.

## More answers

- anonymous

so u = 2x+3
u' = 2
v = √(1-2x)
v' = -1/√(1-2x)

- anonymous

The quotient rule says dy/dx = (u'v - uv')/v^2

- anonymous

ok and from there I begin to distribute, correct?

- anonymous

u can do it with quotient rule

- anonymous

Thats it follow (u'v - uv')/v^2

- anonymous

|dw:1331119146075:dw| use this this is the division rule

- anonymous

where u and v are two fuctions

- anonymous

I think that the square root in the function os throwing me off but I think that it would disappear in the deno. right? just leaving 1-2x on the bottom?

- anonymous

exactly. you are right. square root dissapears. THat makes the sum a lot easier

- .Sam.

##### 1 Attachment

- anonymous

Thank you! I was working it out and ended with the same result.

- anonymous

One final question... how would you find the eq. of a line tangent to the graph f(x) = √(2x+9) at x=0 ?

- anonymous

take the first derivative of f(x) and equate all x to zero it gives the gradient of the tangent to the line at x=0

- .Sam.

differentiate √(2x+9)
then equate x=0 to the differentiated expression and get your gradient
then create new equation using
y-y1=m(x-x1)

- anonymous

then use y=mx+c to get the equa. of the line

- .Sam.

to find y1 just equate x=0 to original equation, y=√(2x+9), then get your y1

- anonymous

ok I am still a little shaky on deffrentiating a radical equation, would it be 1/2x+9 ?

- .Sam.

|dw:1331120584519:dw|

- anonymous

when u dof. the above one it'll be 1/(2x+9)^1/2

- anonymous

you have forgot the 1/2

- .Sam.

1/2 cancelled by 2

- .Sam.

chain rule

- anonymous

ok so using the chain rule I use a fraction to symbolize the same radical function then move the 1/2 down and subtract by 1 to get my new power...got it

- anonymous

where did the "2" on the right come from though?

- anonymous

not that 1/2 i meant the power 1/2|dw:1331120933568:dw| this should be what u getting aftr dif.

- .Sam.

Example,
|dw:1331120907510:dw|

- anonymous

Ok, so since it was in the deno. it was risen to the 2nd power and that is how is came to cancel the 1/2 right?

- anonymous

in the orig. differentation

- .Sam.

the 2 in the numerator when differentiating, so it will cancel the 1/2

- .Sam.

\[\huge \sqrt{x}=x ^{\frac{1}{2}}\]

- anonymous

ok I undrstand that example in omitting the radical but where did the 2 appear to make that cancel?

- anonymous

that is what is throwing me for a loop haha

- .Sam.

the half of 2 is 1

- anonymous

wait --look at this.. this how u solve n this is whr it got cancelled|dw:1331121592002:dw|

- anonymous

nevermind it came as a result of the y' and omitting the 9

- anonymous

or making 2x+9 just 2 right?

- anonymous

I cant get u?

- anonymous

lol I can't get myself sometime haha but I think I understand that the 2 came as a result of taking the derivative of just 2x+9 resulting in just the 2 remaining...I think : /

- anonymous

ohh that one..wait this is clear the prob.|dw:1331122282837:dw| cool?

- anonymous

yea... that I what I was trying to say but I guess my wording is off. I see where the 2 came from

- anonymous

:)

- anonymous

Haha thanks. So then from there I plug in my x=0 to solve for that equation

- anonymous

and then use that solution in point-slope form

- anonymous

that is correct. :) and then use thegradient equation to find the gradient...and the eq. of the line

- anonymous

hey shana as u say the 2 in the denominator cannot get cancelled...

- anonymous

which gives me 3 from the graident and 1/3 for my derivative function

- anonymous

|dw:1331123039074:dw|

- anonymous

|dw:1331123158889:dw|

- anonymous

correct?

- anonymous

correct

- anonymous

good deal! Thank you for all of you help and have an awesome day or night wherever you are!

- anonymous

|dw:1331123407516:dw|

- anonymous

hhe it'll be night :) Anytime . I love guiding others not for money but for joy. :)

- anonymous

again how di u agree abt that 2 getting cancelled in the differentaition part

- anonymous

well salini, when u intergrate, the power comes to the front. ok? but when u again use the chain rule to integrate 2X u have to again multiply by 2. so they get cancelled off.

- anonymous

oh yeah 2x part......

- anonymous

we cant give u money here instead we give away medals!

- anonymous

I really dont do this for money.... your medals will be highly appreciated.. I just joined today n already in level 10. :) This is a good place to give away my knowledge.

Looking for something else?

Not the answer you are looking for? Search for more explanations.