I get tripped up at 5:30 (also new to implicit differentiation). Taking the derivative of (x^2*y) gives (2xy + x^2y'), but I'm not clear on how the chain rule was applied. It does look like the product rule though. Is that possibly what was meant?
well this method is much mechanical and i have to say its brilliant but i m worried about my teachers solution about the Exact DE, as she says y=∫Mdx +∫ (terms of N containing y)dy,
i cant make sure the relation between your solution and my teachers,,can u deifne a little bit that formula???????????/
well this method is much mechanical and i have to say its brilliant but i m worried about my teachers solution about the Exact DE, as she says y=∫Mdx +∫ (terms of N containing y)dy,
i cant make sure the relation between your solution and my teachers,,can u deifne a little bit that formula???????????/
Dude, the best diff eqs course I've ever taken, I´m trying to finish my major (electronics engineering) down here in Mexico City, and since I don't have time enough to attend classes at the campus (you know, life in Mexico is harder, and I had to get a job), I searched and found these videos, but in order to go ahead with electric circuits theory, I must find courses as good as these ones, but for Fourier Transform themes, please let me know if you have videos for it
i have been studying youtube for my math classes for about 5 yrs now. and i have to say YOU are by far the best teacher on youtube. not only you give good example you are very conceptual. if you taught in my school, i would totally take your class! once again, THANK YOU SO MUCH!
I'm having trouble convincing me of what you wrote at around 5:43 (partial derivative of psi with respect to x). In particular, I don't get how the partial of the "2y^3 + 3y" portions aren't just 0 (they're constants in x so wouldn't the derivative of a constant be =0 ???)
I was actually taking the regular derivative of psi with respect to x (the top 'd' in d/dx does look a little curly which may have confused you). So on the parts with the "y"s, you need to use the chain rule (implicit differentiation).
I have an easier way of finding h(y).
1) Remove all terms containing x from N
2) h(y) is the antiderivative of the remaining terms
kourosh89 5 months ago
I get tripped up at 5:30 (also new to implicit differentiation). Taking the derivative of (x^2*y) gives (2xy + x^2y'), but I'm not clear on how the chain rule was applied. It does look like the product rule though. Is that possibly what was meant?
auralacuity 7 months ago
wow I'm finally understanding things. I wish our teacher didnt BS through alot of stuff and just told us straight forward like this.
kewlgeko 1 year ago
Why do you need to change the original form? Isn't ___dx + ___dy = 0 what we want?
brco2003 1 year ago
U WANTED US TO NOT BEING A ROBOT AND I FINALY UNDERSTANT U WHEN U TAKE THE DIRIVATIVE OF PSI AT THE END AND SHOW US ITS THE SAME
immortal6699 1 year ago
Thanks
edd9139 1 year ago
good stuff!
ryanguy6789 1 year ago
This has been flagged as spam show
well this method is much mechanical and i have to say its brilliant but i m worried about my teachers solution about the Exact DE, as she says y=∫Mdx +∫ (terms of N containing y)dy,
i cant make sure the relation between your solution and my teachers,,can u deifne a little bit that formula???????????/
Mubasher77 1 year ago
well this method is much mechanical and i have to say its brilliant but i m worried about my teachers solution about the Exact DE, as she says y=∫Mdx +∫ (terms of N containing y)dy,
i cant make sure the relation between your solution and my teachers,,can u deifne a little bit that formula???????????/
Mubasher77 1 year ago
Thank you sal :) You are an awesome teacher. What you do is very much appreciated
purplemjhope17 1 year ago
hey man your videos have helped me understand differential equations soo much!! thank you!!!! please keep em coming!!
S41YAN 1 year ago
You are an incredible teacher!!!
zapo147 1 year ago
i love you.........!
remsenking 2 years ago 2
Hi Sal,
Why couldn't we just take straight a sum of two integrals of (3x^2-2xy+2) + (6y^2-x^2+3) ? It gives the same result....
Thanks
autorancho 2 years ago
@autorancho hahahaahaahaahaahahaa
thedude2888 2 years ago
this helped me through my first Diff Equ test...thank you
xiewenyi 2 years ago 9
Dude, the best diff eqs course I've ever taken, I´m trying to finish my major (electronics engineering) down here in Mexico City, and since I don't have time enough to attend classes at the campus (you know, life in Mexico is harder, and I had to get a job), I searched and found these videos, but in order to go ahead with electric circuits theory, I must find courses as good as these ones, but for Fourier Transform themes, please let me know if you have videos for it
luischuchopepe 2 years ago 16
@luischuchopepe UNAM?
PCGamerPortal 8 months ago
i have been studying youtube for my math classes for about 5 yrs now. and i have to say YOU are by far the best teacher on youtube. not only you give good example you are very conceptual. if you taught in my school, i would totally take your class! once again, THANK YOU SO MUCH!
sanjosebum85 2 years ago 6
gracias sal
luistr01 2 years ago 4
I'm having trouble convincing me of what you wrote at around 5:43 (partial derivative of psi with respect to x). In particular, I don't get how the partial of the "2y^3 + 3y" portions aren't just 0 (they're constants in x so wouldn't the derivative of a constant be =0 ???)
stickymage 3 years ago 4
I was actually taking the regular derivative of psi with respect to x (the top 'd' in d/dx does look a little curly which may have confused you). So on the parts with the "y"s, you need to use the chain rule (implicit differentiation).
khanacademy 3 years ago 4
d'oh
stickymage 3 years ago
nice man
gamemaster014 3 years ago 2