I'm having trouble with 1F-7.b) if anyone would be kind enough to help, it would be greatly appreciated. It seems to me like obvious choice is the quotient rule and chain rule to solve this, or possibly the product rule with the chain rule. If these are indeed the ways to approach the problem, I may need a step by step :( Link to problem set: http://ocw.mit.edu/courses/mathematics/18-01-single-variable-calculus-fall-2006/readings/e_exrcs_scsn_1_7.pdf Link to solution: http://ocw.mit.edu/courses/mathematics/18-01-single-variable-calculus-fall-2006/readings/s_solutns_exrcis.pdf

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.

A community for students.

I'm having trouble with 1F-7.b) if anyone would be kind enough to help, it would be greatly appreciated. It seems to me like obvious choice is the quotient rule and chain rule to solve this, or possibly the product rule with the chain rule. If these are indeed the ways to approach the problem, I may need a step by step :( Link to problem set: http://ocw.mit.edu/courses/mathematics/18-01-single-variable-calculus-fall-2006/readings/e_exrcs_scsn_1_7.pdf Link to solution: http://ocw.mit.edu/courses/mathematics/18-01-single-variable-calculus-fall-2006/readings/s_solutns_exrcis.pdf

MIT 18.01 Single Variable Calculus (OCW)
I got my questions answered at brainly.com in under 10 minutes. Go to brainly.com now for free help!
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 this expert

answer on brainly

SEE EXPERT ANSWER

Get your free account and access expert answers to this and thousands of other questions

Chain rule and quotient rule are what is needed here. Have you tried rewriting the radical in exponential form? You could do without the quotient rule if you make the exponential form of that radical a negative (i.e., the reciprocal form). It would go something like this:\[m _{0}(1-\frac{ v^2 }{ c^2 })^\frac{ -1 }{ 2 }.\] We could make things visually simpler by realizing that v squared over c squared is this:\[(\frac{ v }{ c })^2,\]and then we can make a quick variable substitution of:\[u^2=(\frac{ v }{ c })^2.\] The substitution is tricky, so I suggest just trying it so that you can go through the motions and get an idea of where this one goes. Then, when you have that, if your answer doesn't match up to the solution, go back and do it without that u substitution.
I got it with the substitution after a couple of attempts, thank you.

Not the answer you are looking for?

Search for more explanations.

Ask your own question

Other answers:

Not the answer you are looking for?

Search for more explanations.

Ask your own question