context
stringlengths
545
71.9k
questionsrc
stringlengths
16
10.2k
question
stringlengths
11
563
let 's now generalize what we did in the last video . so if this is my y-axis and this is -- that 's not that straight . this right over here is my x-axis . and let 's say i have two functions . so i 'm just going to say it in general terms . so let 's say i have a function right over here . so let 's say it looks some...
so if we rotate this thing around the x-axis , we end up with a washer . that 's why we 're going to call this the washer method . and it 's really just kind of the disk method , where you 're gutting out the inside of a disk .
how do we know when to use the washer method or the disc method ?
let 's now generalize what we did in the last video . so if this is my y-axis and this is -- that 's not that straight . this right over here is my x-axis . and let 's say i have two functions . so i 'm just going to say it in general terms . so let 's say i have a function right over here . so let 's say it looks some...
of pi times -- what 's f of x squared ? f of x squared , square root of x squared is just x , minus g of x squared . g of x is x , that squared is x squared . and then we multiply times dx .
does using [ f ( x ) - g ( x ) ] ^2 for the squared radius give you the volume if the axis of rotation is y=g ( x ) ?
let 's now generalize what we did in the last video . so if this is my y-axis and this is -- that 's not that straight . this right over here is my x-axis . and let 's say i have two functions . so i 'm just going to say it in general terms . so let 's say i have a function right over here . so let 's say it looks some...
f of x squared , square root of x squared is just x , minus g of x squared . g of x is x , that squared is x squared . and then we multiply times dx .
we know that sqrt ( x ) is above x in the coordinate plane but what if , instead of integral of sqrt ( x ) - x , we integrate x - sqrt ( x ) and revolve that around the x-axis ?
let 's now generalize what we did in the last video . so if this is my y-axis and this is -- that 's not that straight . this right over here is my x-axis . and let 's say i have two functions . so i 'm just going to say it in general terms . so let 's say i have a function right over here . so let 's say it looks some...
so what 's the area of the inside ? this part right over here ? well , we 're going to subtract it out .
so what happens when you do n't know the equation of the part that creates a washer ?
let 's now generalize what we did in the last video . so if this is my y-axis and this is -- that 's not that straight . this right over here is my x-axis . and let 's say i have two functions . so i 'm just going to say it in general terms . so let 's say i have a function right over here . so let 's say it looks some...
so let me see how well i can draw this . so depth dx . that 's the side of this washer .
is dx the same for all the washers ?
let 's now generalize what we did in the last video . so if this is my y-axis and this is -- that 's not that straight . this right over here is my x-axis . and let 's say i have two functions . so i 'm just going to say it in general terms . so let 's say i have a function right over here . so let 's say it looks some...
so let 's say it looks something like this . so that 's one function . so this is y is equal to f of x .
to do the washer method , does one function have to be greater than the other over the entire interval for which the shape 's volume is being calculated ?
let 's now generalize what we did in the last video . so if this is my y-axis and this is -- that 's not that straight . this right over here is my x-axis . and let 's say i have two functions . so i 'm just going to say it in general terms . so let 's say i have a function right over here . so let 's say it looks some...
so if we rotate this thing around the x-axis , we end up with a washer . that 's why we 're going to call this the washer method . and it 's really just kind of the disk method , where you 're gutting out the inside of a disk .
what 's the big difference between washer , shell and disc method ?
let 's now generalize what we did in the last video . so if this is my y-axis and this is -- that 's not that straight . this right over here is my x-axis . and let 's say i have two functions . so i 'm just going to say it in general terms . so let 's say i have a function right over here . so let 's say it looks some...
so if this is my y-axis and this is -- that 's not that straight . this right over here is my x-axis . and let 's say i have two functions .
the equation seems to work only when rotating about the x-axis , so what about when it is rotated about the y-axis or when y=-3 ?
let 's now generalize what we did in the last video . so if this is my y-axis and this is -- that 's not that straight . this right over here is my x-axis . and let 's say i have two functions . so i 'm just going to say it in general terms . so let 's say i have a function right over here . so let 's say it looks some...
but this is our interval we 're saying in general terms , from a to b . and this will give our volume . this right over here is the volume of each washer .
why the calculated volume is exact and not an approximation ?
hello everyone . so i 'm talking about how to find the tangent plane to a graph . and i think the first step of that is to just figure out how we control planes in three dimensions in the first place . so what i have pictured here is a red dot representing a point in three dimensions , and the coordinates of that poin...
and the reason i 'm doing this , notice this does n't change the partial derivative information , it 's just if we take the partial derivative with respect to x , this will still be two , and when we take it with respect to y , this will still be one . but the reason i 'm putting these in here , is because we 're gon n...
grant , what programme are you using to make these 3d plots ?
( piano music ) beth : when you walk into the gallery , this painting just stands out . it almost seems to glow . steven : the hands are unbelievable . beth : he does seem particularly interested in hands . we follow them from the figure of joseph holding out his hands , looking questioning , and then the delicate way ...
the wealth of the king 's crown sits neglected against that rock . he 's far more interested in christ and in his devotion to the divine than that worldly wealth , that worldly power , but it 's so interesting , because christ , in mary 's lap , is not actually paying attention to the king . christ stares out directly ...
why is mary so pale ?
( piano music ) beth : when you walk into the gallery , this painting just stands out . it almost seems to glow . steven : the hands are unbelievable . beth : he does seem particularly interested in hands . we follow them from the figure of joseph holding out his hands , looking questioning , and then the delicate way ...
beth : he does seem particularly interested in hands . we follow them from the figure of joseph holding out his hands , looking questioning , and then the delicate way that mary holds up christ 's left hand , and then the figure of the first magi , whose hands are in prayer as he worships the christ child . steven : th...
why is joseph so old ?
( piano music ) beth : when you walk into the gallery , this painting just stands out . it almost seems to glow . steven : the hands are unbelievable . beth : he does seem particularly interested in hands . we follow them from the figure of joseph holding out his hands , looking questioning , and then the delicate way ...
the wealth of the king 's crown sits neglected against that rock . he 's far more interested in christ and in his devotion to the divine than that worldly wealth , that worldly power , but it 's so interesting , because christ , in mary 's lap , is not actually paying attention to the king . christ stares out directly ...
why does mary always wear dark blue ?
( piano music ) beth : when you walk into the gallery , this painting just stands out . it almost seems to glow . steven : the hands are unbelievable . beth : he does seem particularly interested in hands . we follow them from the figure of joseph holding out his hands , looking questioning , and then the delicate way ...
beth : yeah , that really seems like skin . steven : does n't it ? steven : look at the way we can see the light on his palm , between his fingers .
why does n't christ have a penis ?
( piano music ) beth : when you walk into the gallery , this painting just stands out . it almost seems to glow . steven : the hands are unbelievable . beth : he does seem particularly interested in hands . we follow them from the figure of joseph holding out his hands , looking questioning , and then the delicate way ...
( piano music ) beth : when you walk into the gallery , this painting just stands out . it almost seems to glow .
is there any symbolic significance in the choice of painting iris and columbine flowers ?
( piano music ) beth : when you walk into the gallery , this painting just stands out . it almost seems to glow . steven : the hands are unbelievable . beth : he does seem particularly interested in hands . we follow them from the figure of joseph holding out his hands , looking questioning , and then the delicate way ...
steven : the hands are unbelievable . beth : he does seem particularly interested in hands . we follow them from the figure of joseph holding out his hands , looking questioning , and then the delicate way that mary holds up christ 's left hand , and then the figure of the first magi , whose hands are in prayer as he w...
especially the faces in the background seem to have gotten less of the artist 's attention to detail ... no ?
let me do a little experiment . let 's say i have oxygen here , and we know that oxygen is about 21 % of the atmosphere . and i decide to take a cup , let 's say a cup like this -- simple cup of water . and i leave it out on the counter . and it 's about room temperature , about 25 degrees celsius here . and i want to ...
so this is my calculation for oxygen . and so far , so good , right ? but now i decide to challenge myself and say , let 's do this again .
the h2co3 is carbonic acid , right ?
let me do a little experiment . let 's say i have oxygen here , and we know that oxygen is about 21 % of the atmosphere . and i decide to take a cup , let 's say a cup like this -- simple cup of water . and i leave it out on the counter . and it 's about room temperature , about 25 degrees celsius here . and i want to ...
i would actually measure the concentration there , and that 's the measure of oxygen . so i 've learned about henry 's law , and i can think well , you know , i know the partial pressure now . and i can rearrange the formula so that it looks something like this .
i know you are meant to divide partial pressure by concentration to get kh but how exactly did you get 769 and 29 ?
let me do a little experiment . let 's say i have oxygen here , and we know that oxygen is about 21 % of the atmosphere . and i decide to take a cup , let 's say a cup like this -- simple cup of water . and i leave it out on the counter . and it 's about room temperature , about 25 degrees celsius here . and i want to ...
now , you might say , well , that 's fine for 25 degrees celsius . but what about body temperature ? what 's happening in our actual body ?
the difference in the ratios of co2 solubility to o2 solubility between room temperature and body temperature- is that more due to co2 becoming less soluble at warmer temps , or o2 becoming more soluble ?
let me do a little experiment . let 's say i have oxygen here , and we know that oxygen is about 21 % of the atmosphere . and i decide to take a cup , let 's say a cup like this -- simple cup of water . and i leave it out on the counter . and it 's about room temperature , about 25 degrees celsius here . and i want to ...
and so these k sub h values are actually temperature dependent . and they 're going to change as you increase the temperature . so at this new temperature , it turns out that carbon dioxide is about 22 times more soluble than oxygen .
and if you have hypothermia , is the increase in co2 solubility or decrease in o2 solubility pronounced enough to lead to acidosis or hypoxia , respectively ?
let me do a little experiment . let 's say i have oxygen here , and we know that oxygen is about 21 % of the atmosphere . and i decide to take a cup , let 's say a cup like this -- simple cup of water . and i leave it out on the counter . and it 's about room temperature , about 25 degrees celsius here . and i want to ...
let me do a little experiment . let 's say i have oxygen here , and we know that oxygen is about 21 % of the atmosphere .
does that contribute at all to death from hypothermia ?
let me do a little experiment . let 's say i have oxygen here , and we know that oxygen is about 21 % of the atmosphere . and i decide to take a cup , let 's say a cup like this -- simple cup of water . and i leave it out on the counter . and it 's about room temperature , about 25 degrees celsius here . and i want to ...
and on this side , on the first side of our experiment , we had lots of oxygens leaving this water . they did n't like being in water . they were leaving readily .
is n't most of the o2 carried by our blood carried bound to hemoglobin ?
let me do a little experiment . let 's say i have oxygen here , and we know that oxygen is about 21 % of the atmosphere . and i decide to take a cup , let 's say a cup like this -- simple cup of water . and i leave it out on the counter . and it 's about room temperature , about 25 degrees celsius here . and i want to ...
so in our lungs , we have 37 degrees celsius . and instead of water -- actually , i should n't be writing water -- instead of water , it 's blood , which is slightly different than water . the consistency is different .
so why do we care about the solubility of o2 in the blood ?
let me do a little experiment . let 's say i have oxygen here , and we know that oxygen is about 21 % of the atmosphere . and i decide to take a cup , let 's say a cup like this -- simple cup of water . and i leave it out on the counter . and it 's about room temperature , about 25 degrees celsius here . and i want to ...
the consistency is different . and so these k sub h values are actually temperature dependent . and they 're going to change as you increase the temperature .
what does the subscript h represent in kh ?
let me do a little experiment . let 's say i have oxygen here , and we know that oxygen is about 21 % of the atmosphere . and i decide to take a cup , let 's say a cup like this -- simple cup of water . and i leave it out on the counter . and it 's about room temperature , about 25 degrees celsius here . and i want to ...
because look , these partial pressures are basically the same . i mean , not even basically , they 're exactly the same . there 's no difference in the partial pressure .
when rishi says `` soluble '' throughout the video , does he mean more likely to enter the liquid ?
let me do a little experiment . let 's say i have oxygen here , and we know that oxygen is about 21 % of the atmosphere . and i decide to take a cup , let 's say a cup like this -- simple cup of water . and i leave it out on the counter . and it 's about room temperature , about 25 degrees celsius here . and i want to ...
we only had a little bit of oxygen but now i 've got tons of carbon dioxide . and i do n't want to make it uneven . i mentioned before , we have nitrogen -- so let me still draw a bunch of nitrogen -- that will outnumber the carbon dioxide dramatically .
i am wondering why we want to have a higher co2 level in our blood than o2 ?
let me do a little experiment . let 's say i have oxygen here , and we know that oxygen is about 21 % of the atmosphere . and i decide to take a cup , let 's say a cup like this -- simple cup of water . and i leave it out on the counter . and it 's about room temperature , about 25 degrees celsius here . and i want to ...
i could say , well , 769 divided by 29 equals about 26 . so that 's another way of saying that carbon dioxide is 26 times more soluble than oxygen . i 'll put that in parentheses -- than oxygen .
does the body deal with it in another way , or is it ok for a patient to handle high levels of co2 for a while in return for not dying of respiratory failure ?
let me do a little experiment . let 's say i have oxygen here , and we know that oxygen is about 21 % of the atmosphere . and i decide to take a cup , let 's say a cup like this -- simple cup of water . and i leave it out on the counter . and it 's about room temperature , about 25 degrees celsius here . and i want to ...
let me do a little experiment . let 's say i have oxygen here , and we know that oxygen is about 21 % of the atmosphere .
what factors does the time to saturate/equilibriate depends , under such a experiment ?
let me do a little experiment . let 's say i have oxygen here , and we know that oxygen is about 21 % of the atmosphere . and i decide to take a cup , let 's say a cup like this -- simple cup of water . and i leave it out on the counter . and it 's about room temperature , about 25 degrees celsius here . and i want to ...
so i 'm going to write the units of the kh down here . i can say , well , 769 liters times atmospheres over moles . and that 's something that i 've just calculated .
in from where does 769 come from ?
let me do a little experiment . let 's say i have oxygen here , and we know that oxygen is about 21 % of the atmosphere . and i decide to take a cup , let 's say a cup like this -- simple cup of water . and i leave it out on the counter . and it 's about room temperature , about 25 degrees celsius here . and i want to ...
let me do a little experiment . let 's say i have oxygen here , and we know that oxygen is about 21 % of the atmosphere . and i decide to take a cup , let 's say a cup like this -- simple cup of water .
how can low partial pressure of oxygen shift the oxygen dissociation curve to the right ?
so we 're told let g be a differentiable function defined over the closed interval from negative six to six . the graph of its derivative , so they 're giving the graphing the derivative of g , g prime is given below . so this is n't the graph of g. this is the graph of g prime . what is the x value of the left-most i...
and this is our actual , i guess you could call it , the original function . so an inflection point are points where our second derivative is switching sides . it 's going from positive negative or negative to positive .
can we still tell if there is an inflection point if there is a node in the first derivative ?
so we 're told let g be a differentiable function defined over the closed interval from negative six to six . the graph of its derivative , so they 're giving the graphing the derivative of g , g prime is given below . so this is n't the graph of g. this is the graph of g prime . what is the x value of the left-most i...
so , if you look at the choices , if we want to answer the original question , well the left-most one is it x is equal to negative three ? it 's x equals negative three . x equals negative one is indeed a x value , where we have an inflection point . and let 's see , x equals two is one , and so is x equals four .
what do we call the plateaus in a f ' ( x ) or first derivative curve ( places where the curve briefly goes flat relative to the x axis similarly to a horizontal tangent of the f ( x ) curve but without creating a max or min point ) ?
so we 're told let g be a differentiable function defined over the closed interval from negative six to six . the graph of its derivative , so they 're giving the graphing the derivative of g , g prime is given below . so this is n't the graph of g. this is the graph of g prime . what is the x value of the left-most i...
so , if you look at the choices , if we want to answer the original question , well the left-most one is it x is equal to negative three ? it 's x equals negative three . x equals negative one is indeed a x value , where we have an inflection point . and let 's see , x equals two is one , and so is x equals four .
before the point x= -3 , if the function was increasing suddenly how it can become 0 at x = -3 , is it not decreasing there ?
so we 're told let g be a differentiable function defined over the closed interval from negative six to six . the graph of its derivative , so they 're giving the graphing the derivative of g , g prime is given below . so this is n't the graph of g. this is the graph of g prime . what is the x value of the left-most i...
and let 's see , x equals two is one , and so is x equals four . so they actually listed , all of these are inflection points . and they just wanted the left-most one .
so the change in direction of the curves define where the inflection points would be on the original problem ?
beth harris : it 's often the case that when you 're traveling with the baby , it demands a lot of attention . and that 's what 's happening in this small painting by degas called `` at the races in the countryside . '' steven zucker : and that infant is clearly the center of this family 's attention . beth harris : an...
i mean , look at the way he 's cropped the wagon wheels . he 's cropped the horses . they do n't have the bottom of their legs .
why was some of the painting- such as the legs of the horses- cut off ?
beth harris : it 's often the case that when you 're traveling with the baby , it demands a lot of attention . and that 's what 's happening in this small painting by degas called `` at the races in the countryside . '' steven zucker : and that infant is clearly the center of this family 's attention . beth harris : an...
steven zucker : and actually you can see her breast is exposed , and all of the figures are looking down at the child . so issues of class are very much built into this painting . beth harris : an upper class women would certainly not reveal herself in this way .
why is the painting so blurry ?
beth harris : it 's often the case that when you 're traveling with the baby , it demands a lot of attention . and that 's what 's happening in this small painting by degas called `` at the races in the countryside . '' steven zucker : and that infant is clearly the center of this family 's attention . beth harris : an...
and there is all of that attention on the infant , and whether it 's going to eat , and whether it 's going to stop being fussy . historically , upper class women often did n't nurse their own children and would hire women who were known as wet nurses who would nurse infants . steven zucker : so a very intimate kind of...
why did upper-class women hire wet nurses ?
beth harris : it 's often the case that when you 're traveling with the baby , it demands a lot of attention . and that 's what 's happening in this small painting by degas called `` at the races in the countryside . '' steven zucker : and that infant is clearly the center of this family 's attention . beth harris : an...
and there is all of that attention on the infant , and whether it 's going to eat , and whether it 's going to stop being fussy . historically , upper class women often did n't nurse their own children and would hire women who were known as wet nurses who would nurse infants . steven zucker : so a very intimate kind of...
do we have historical confirmation of the identity of the women in the carriage ?
beth harris : it 's often the case that when you 're traveling with the baby , it demands a lot of attention . and that 's what 's happening in this small painting by degas called `` at the races in the countryside . '' steven zucker : and that infant is clearly the center of this family 's attention . beth harris : an...
beth harris : it 's really very sweet . and there is all of that attention on the infant , and whether it 's going to eat , and whether it 's going to stop being fussy . historically , upper class women often did n't nurse their own children and would hire women who were known as wet nurses who would nurse infants .
why did people stop wearing hats ?
consider f which is defined for all real numbers . at what arguments x is f of x not differentiable ? so to think about that , i 'm actually going to try to visualize what f prime of x must look like . so i 'm going to do f prime of x in this purple color . so if we look at f of x right over here , it looks like its sl...
so if i were to draw its derivative , its derivative would look something like this . its derivative looks something like this . but then something interesting happens at x equals negative 2 .
like can you write an equations showing how certain point will not be able to find a derivative ?
consider f which is defined for all real numbers . at what arguments x is f of x not differentiable ? so to think about that , i 'm actually going to try to visualize what f prime of x must look like . so i 'm going to do f prime of x in this purple color . so if we look at f of x right over here , it looks like its sl...
so we do not have the same limit of the secant slope as we approach from the left- and right-hand sides . so at both of these points we see the derivative jump , and it looks like f of x is not differentiable .
so , essentially , a function is not differentiable at points of discontinuity ?
consider f which is defined for all real numbers . at what arguments x is f of x not differentiable ? so to think about that , i 'm actually going to try to visualize what f prime of x must look like . so i 'm going to do f prime of x in this purple color . so if we look at f of x right over here , it looks like its sl...
the slope is 0 here . so right as x crosses 3 , the slope becomes 0 . so we immediately see there are points where it looks like the slope jumps .
the question is that if we divide the function in the graph into 3parts : y1 ( x < = -2 ) , y2 ( -2 < x < =3 ) , and y3 ( x > 3 ) , are the points ( -2 , -3 ) and ( 3 , 4.5 approximately ) still not differentiable ?
consider f which is defined for all real numbers . at what arguments x is f of x not differentiable ? so to think about that , i 'm actually going to try to visualize what f prime of x must look like . so i 'm going to do f prime of x in this purple color . so if we look at f of x right over here , it looks like its sl...
so we immediately see there are points where it looks like the slope jumps . and at these points we really do n't have a defined derivative . the slope jumps there as well .
then will the value of derivative be defined there ?
consider f which is defined for all real numbers . at what arguments x is f of x not differentiable ? so to think about that , i 'm actually going to try to visualize what f prime of x must look like . so i 'm going to do f prime of x in this purple color . so if we look at f of x right over here , it looks like its sl...
it looks like the slope is a constant negative 2 . so if i were to draw its derivative , its derivative would look something like this . its derivative looks something like this .
so is differentiability essentially continuity of the derivative of a function ?
consider f which is defined for all real numbers . at what arguments x is f of x not differentiable ? so to think about that , i 'm actually going to try to visualize what f prime of x must look like . so i 'm going to do f prime of x in this purple color . so if we look at f of x right over here , it looks like its sl...
the slope jumps there as well . and so at what arguments is f not differentiable ? well , it 's not differentiable when x is equal to negative 2 . when x is equal to negative 2 , we really do n't have a slope there .
so when you say when a function is not differentiable , is it the same thing as saying where the graph is not continuous ?
consider f which is defined for all real numbers . at what arguments x is f of x not differentiable ? so to think about that , i 'm actually going to try to visualize what f prime of x must look like . so i 'm going to do f prime of x in this purple color . so if we look at f of x right over here , it looks like its sl...
consider f which is defined for all real numbers . at what arguments x is f of x not differentiable ? so to think about that , i 'm actually going to try to visualize what f prime of x must look like .
how did sal get the lines of f ' ( x ) ?
consider f which is defined for all real numbers . at what arguments x is f of x not differentiable ? so to think about that , i 'm actually going to try to visualize what f prime of x must look like . so i 'm going to do f prime of x in this purple color . so if we look at f of x right over here , it looks like its sl...
and it looks like right out the get go , if i were to estimate the slope of its tangent line , it starts changing . it 's not a line anymore . it 's a curve .
what is a secant line ?
consider f which is defined for all real numbers . at what arguments x is f of x not differentiable ? so to think about that , i 'm actually going to try to visualize what f prime of x must look like . so i 'm going to do f prime of x in this purple color . so if we look at f of x right over here , it looks like its sl...
consider f which is defined for all real numbers . at what arguments x is f of x not differentiable ? so to think about that , i 'm actually going to try to visualize what f prime of x must look like .
at the points on that f ( x ) where the function is not differentiable ( when x = -2 and 2 ) , do limits still exist at those points ?
consider f which is defined for all real numbers . at what arguments x is f of x not differentiable ? so to think about that , i 'm actually going to try to visualize what f prime of x must look like . so i 'm going to do f prime of x in this purple color . so if we look at f of x right over here , it looks like its sl...
and it looks like it continues to get lower all the way until you get to x equals 3 . so it looks like the slope of the line is -- it looks like it 's getting lower at a constant rate , i guess i could say . so it looks like it 's doing something like this over this interval .
and could someone please explain the difference between continuity and differentiability ?
consider f which is defined for all real numbers . at what arguments x is f of x not differentiable ? so to think about that , i 'm actually going to try to visualize what f prime of x must look like . so i 'm going to do f prime of x in this purple color . so if we look at f of x right over here , it looks like its sl...
consider f which is defined for all real numbers . at what arguments x is f of x not differentiable ? so to think about that , i 'm actually going to try to visualize what f prime of x must look like .
how will you know the value of f ' ( x ) ?
consider f which is defined for all real numbers . at what arguments x is f of x not differentiable ? so to think about that , i 'm actually going to try to visualize what f prime of x must look like . so i 'm going to do f prime of x in this purple color . so if we look at f of x right over here , it looks like its sl...
so if we look at f of x right over here , it looks like its slope is pretty much consistently negative 2 over this interval between x equals , i guess , it 's like negative 8 and 1/2 all the way up to x equals negative 2 . it looks like the slope is a constant negative 2 . so if i were to draw its derivative , its deri...
example seconds , how did you know the derivative is a constant -2 ?
consider f which is defined for all real numbers . at what arguments x is f of x not differentiable ? so to think about that , i 'm actually going to try to visualize what f prime of x must look like . so i 'm going to do f prime of x in this purple color . so if we look at f of x right over here , it looks like its sl...
so i 'm going to do f prime of x in this purple color . so if we look at f of x right over here , it looks like its slope is pretty much consistently negative 2 over this interval between x equals , i guess , it 's like negative 8 and 1/2 all the way up to x equals negative 2 . it looks like the slope is a constant neg...
should n't the line representing the derivative move upwards ( positive ) towards x=2 ( where is would be 0 ) then downwards ( negative ) to x=3 ?
consider f which is defined for all real numbers . at what arguments x is f of x not differentiable ? so to think about that , i 'm actually going to try to visualize what f prime of x must look like . so i 'm going to do f prime of x in this purple color . so if we look at f of x right over here , it looks like its sl...
so i 'm just trying to , obviously , estimate it . so it looks like the slope goes up to 3 and 1/2 right when i cross that point . and then the slope becomes lower and lower and lower all the way until i get to this point right over here , all the way until i get to x equals 2 .
i thought derivatives are suppose to be tangents of a function at a point ?
consider f which is defined for all real numbers . at what arguments x is f of x not differentiable ? so to think about that , i 'm actually going to try to visualize what f prime of x must look like . so i 'm going to do f prime of x in this purple color . so if we look at f of x right over here , it looks like its sl...
when x is equal to negative 2 , we really do n't have a slope there . remember , when we 're trying to find the slope of the tangent line , we take the limit of the slope of the secant line between that point and some other point on the curve . if we did that as we approached from the left , it looks like the derivativ...
could someone explain how sal calculates exactly the start and end point of the line ?
consider f which is defined for all real numbers . at what arguments x is f of x not differentiable ? so to think about that , i 'm actually going to try to visualize what f prime of x must look like . so i 'm going to do f prime of x in this purple color . so if we look at f of x right over here , it looks like its sl...
consider f which is defined for all real numbers . at what arguments x is f of x not differentiable ? so to think about that , i 'm actually going to try to visualize what f prime of x must look like .
the function f ( x ) in this video is continuous at every point ( at least every point we can see in this graph ) , but it 's not differentiable , because for that , not the function f ( x ) itself must be continuous , but instead the function g ( a , b ) = ( f ( a ) - f ( b ) ) / ( a-b ) ) but g ( a , b ) is not the d...
consider f which is defined for all real numbers . at what arguments x is f of x not differentiable ? so to think about that , i 'm actually going to try to visualize what f prime of x must look like . so i 'm going to do f prime of x in this purple color . so if we look at f of x right over here , it looks like its sl...
so i 'm going to do f prime of x in this purple color . so if we look at f of x right over here , it looks like its slope is pretty much consistently negative 2 over this interval between x equals , i guess , it 's like negative 8 and 1/2 all the way up to x equals negative 2 . it looks like the slope is a constant neg...
derivative of any point between -8.5 to -2 is -2 but the slope is 0 ?
consider f which is defined for all real numbers . at what arguments x is f of x not differentiable ? so to think about that , i 'm actually going to try to visualize what f prime of x must look like . so i 'm going to do f prime of x in this purple color . so if we look at f of x right over here , it looks like its sl...
it 's a curve . the slope of the tangent line right at this point looks like it 's around -- i do n't know -- it looks like it 's around 3 and 1/2 . because if i were to draw a tangent line right over here , it looks like if i move 1 in the x direction , i move up about 3 and 1/2 in the y direction . so i 'm just tryin...
around should n't the line ( pink ) of the derivative be a constant 3.5 from x= -2 , to x=-1 and then start decreasing after -1 ?
consider f which is defined for all real numbers . at what arguments x is f of x not differentiable ? so to think about that , i 'm actually going to try to visualize what f prime of x must look like . so i 'm going to do f prime of x in this purple color . so if we look at f of x right over here , it looks like its sl...
it 's a curve . the slope of the tangent line right at this point looks like it 's around -- i do n't know -- it looks like it 's around 3 and 1/2 . because if i were to draw a tangent line right over here , it looks like if i move 1 in the x direction , i move up about 3 and 1/2 in the y direction . so i 'm just tryin...
around should n't the line ( pink ) of the derivative be a constant 3.5 from x= -2 , to x=-1 and then start decreasing after -1 ?
consider f which is defined for all real numbers . at what arguments x is f of x not differentiable ? so to think about that , i 'm actually going to try to visualize what f prime of x must look like . so i 'm going to do f prime of x in this purple color . so if we look at f of x right over here , it looks like its sl...
the slope is 0 here . so right as x crosses 3 , the slope becomes 0 . so we immediately see there are points where it looks like the slope jumps .
why not stop a x = 0 and y = 3 instead of x=-1 and y=0.5 ?
consider f which is defined for all real numbers . at what arguments x is f of x not differentiable ? so to think about that , i 'm actually going to try to visualize what f prime of x must look like . so i 'm going to do f prime of x in this purple color . so if we look at f of x right over here , it looks like its sl...
consider f which is defined for all real numbers . at what arguments x is f of x not differentiable ? so to think about that , i 'm actually going to try to visualize what f prime of x must look like .
how do i find all values of x for which the function is differentiable ?
consider f which is defined for all real numbers . at what arguments x is f of x not differentiable ? so to think about that , i 'm actually going to try to visualize what f prime of x must look like . so i 'm going to do f prime of x in this purple color . so if we look at f of x right over here , it looks like its sl...
but then right as x crosses 3 , this becomes a flat line . the slope is 0 here . so right as x crosses 3 , the slope becomes 0 .
should n't sal be drawing a line with a slope of -2 ?
consider f which is defined for all real numbers . at what arguments x is f of x not differentiable ? so to think about that , i 'm actually going to try to visualize what f prime of x must look like . so i 'm going to do f prime of x in this purple color . so if we look at f of x right over here , it looks like its sl...
it looks like the slope is a constant negative 2 . so if i were to draw its derivative , its derivative would look something like this . its derivative looks something like this .
considering derivative as the rate of change , how can we define that the rate in 'undefined ' at those point ?
consider f which is defined for all real numbers . at what arguments x is f of x not differentiable ? so to think about that , i 'm actually going to try to visualize what f prime of x must look like . so i 'm going to do f prime of x in this purple color . so if we look at f of x right over here , it looks like its sl...
because if i were to draw a tangent line right over here , it looks like if i move 1 in the x direction , i move up about 3 and 1/2 in the y direction . so i 'm just trying to , obviously , estimate it . so it looks like the slope goes up to 3 and 1/2 right when i cross that point .
obviously we see there is a lot of change , drastic , in fact , but yet rate of change is undefined ?
consider f which is defined for all real numbers . at what arguments x is f of x not differentiable ? so to think about that , i 'm actually going to try to visualize what f prime of x must look like . so i 'm going to do f prime of x in this purple color . so if we look at f of x right over here , it looks like its sl...
consider f which is defined for all real numbers . at what arguments x is f of x not differentiable ? so to think about that , i 'm actually going to try to visualize what f prime of x must look like .
tan ( x ) is differentiable at which intervals ?
consider f which is defined for all real numbers . at what arguments x is f of x not differentiable ? so to think about that , i 'm actually going to try to visualize what f prime of x must look like . so i 'm going to do f prime of x in this purple color . so if we look at f of x right over here , it looks like its sl...
the slope jumps there as well . and so at what arguments is f not differentiable ? well , it 's not differentiable when x is equal to negative 2 . when x is equal to negative 2 , we really do n't have a slope there .
if limit l exists at a where there is a removable discontinuity at a , is the function still differentiable ?
consider f which is defined for all real numbers . at what arguments x is f of x not differentiable ? so to think about that , i 'm actually going to try to visualize what f prime of x must look like . so i 'm going to do f prime of x in this purple color . so if we look at f of x right over here , it looks like its sl...
so we immediately see there are points where it looks like the slope jumps . and at these points we really do n't have a defined derivative . the slope jumps there as well .
sorry to clarify my question , a function with a removable discontinuity is not differentiable because there is no defined derivative at that point ?
consider f which is defined for all real numbers . at what arguments x is f of x not differentiable ? so to think about that , i 'm actually going to try to visualize what f prime of x must look like . so i 'm going to do f prime of x in this purple color . so if we look at f of x right over here , it looks like its sl...
so it looks like it 's doing something like this over this interval . but then right as x crosses 3 , this becomes a flat line . the slope is 0 here . so right as x crosses 3 , the slope becomes 0 . so we immediately see there are points where it looks like the slope jumps .
how u take the derivative a straight line parallel to x-axis ?
consider f which is defined for all real numbers . at what arguments x is f of x not differentiable ? so to think about that , i 'm actually going to try to visualize what f prime of x must look like . so i 'm going to do f prime of x in this purple color . so if we look at f of x right over here , it looks like its sl...
it looks like the slope is a constant negative 2 . so if i were to draw its derivative , its derivative would look something like this . its derivative looks something like this .
is sal simply graphing the values of the function 's derivative at each point ?
consider f which is defined for all real numbers . at what arguments x is f of x not differentiable ? so to think about that , i 'm actually going to try to visualize what f prime of x must look like . so i 'm going to do f prime of x in this purple color . so if we look at f of x right over here , it looks like its sl...
but then right as x crosses 3 , this becomes a flat line . the slope is 0 here . so right as x crosses 3 , the slope becomes 0 .
when we have a non differentiable function , due to a cusp , why do we consider that the slope is approaching infinity ?
consider f which is defined for all real numbers . at what arguments x is f of x not differentiable ? so to think about that , i 'm actually going to try to visualize what f prime of x must look like . so i 'm going to do f prime of x in this purple color . so if we look at f of x right over here , it looks like its sl...
so we do not have the same limit of the secant slope as we approach from the left- and right-hand sides . so at both of these points we see the derivative jump , and it looks like f of x is not differentiable .
so a function is not differentiable when the derivative has jump discontinuities ?
consider f which is defined for all real numbers . at what arguments x is f of x not differentiable ? so to think about that , i 'm actually going to try to visualize what f prime of x must look like . so i 'm going to do f prime of x in this purple color . so if we look at f of x right over here , it looks like its sl...
right as we cross x equals negative 2 , it looks like the slope goes from being negative to being positive . and it looks like right out the get go , if i were to estimate the slope of its tangent line , it starts changing . it 's not a line anymore .
how did sal construct the second slope of the tangent line without calculating ?
consider f which is defined for all real numbers . at what arguments x is f of x not differentiable ? so to think about that , i 'm actually going to try to visualize what f prime of x must look like . so i 'm going to do f prime of x in this purple color . so if we look at f of x right over here , it looks like its sl...
consider f which is defined for all real numbers . at what arguments x is f of x not differentiable ? so to think about that , i 'm actually going to try to visualize what f prime of x must look like .
is the function not differentiable only at -2 or on all x values ?
consider f which is defined for all real numbers . at what arguments x is f of x not differentiable ? so to think about that , i 'm actually going to try to visualize what f prime of x must look like . so i 'm going to do f prime of x in this purple color . so if we look at f of x right over here , it looks like its sl...
consider f which is defined for all real numbers . at what arguments x is f of x not differentiable ? so to think about that , i 'm actually going to try to visualize what f prime of x must look like .
however , if we were to have a function g ' ( x ) ( the derivative of g ( x ) ) , and there was a sharp turn at some point x=c , but g ' ( x ) is continuous , would g ( x ) be differentiable x=c ?
consider f which is defined for all real numbers . at what arguments x is f of x not differentiable ? so to think about that , i 'm actually going to try to visualize what f prime of x must look like . so i 'm going to do f prime of x in this purple color . so if we look at f of x right over here , it looks like its sl...
so i 'm just trying to , obviously , estimate it . so it looks like the slope goes up to 3 and 1/2 right when i cross that point . and then the slope becomes lower and lower and lower all the way until i get to this point right over here , all the way until i get to x equals 2 .
essentially what i 'm saying is that , if there is a sharp turn at some point in the derivatives graph , is the function differentiable at the point ?
consider f which is defined for all real numbers . at what arguments x is f of x not differentiable ? so to think about that , i 'm actually going to try to visualize what f prime of x must look like . so i 'm going to do f prime of x in this purple color . so if we look at f of x right over here , it looks like its sl...
well , it 's not differentiable when x is equal to negative 2 . when x is equal to negative 2 , we really do n't have a slope there . remember , when we 're trying to find the slope of the tangent line , we take the limit of the slope of the secant line between that point and some other point on the curve . if we did t...
if the derivative is the slope of the tangent line to any point , would n't it briefly become 0 at x = -2 ?
consider f which is defined for all real numbers . at what arguments x is f of x not differentiable ? so to think about that , i 'm actually going to try to visualize what f prime of x must look like . so i 'm going to do f prime of x in this purple color . so if we look at f of x right over here , it looks like its sl...
so to think about that , i 'm actually going to try to visualize what f prime of x must look like . so i 'm going to do f prime of x in this purple color . so if we look at f of x right over here , it looks like its slope is pretty much consistently negative 2 over this interval between x equals , i guess , it 's like ...
i do not understand the differential when the x is -3. why is the purple line crossing ( 2,2 ) ?
speaker 1 : we 're on the second floor of the metropolitan museum of art , and we 're looking at a painting by degas , `` the dance class . '' and this is a painting that was , according to the wall text , originally intended for the very first impressionist exhibition in 1874 , but not actually shown until two years ...
speaker 1 : -- of that first impressionist exhibition . speaker 2 : well , this a pretty outrageous painting , really . speaker 1 : it does't look so outrageous to us now , does it ?
why was degas so obsessed with painting ballerinas ?
any pair of points can be connected by a line segment . that 's right . connect two pairs of black points in a way that creates two parallel line segments . so let 's see if we can do that . so i could create one segment that connects this point to this point and then another one that connects this point to this point ...
that 's right . connect two pairs of black points in a way that creates two parallel line segments . so let 's see if we can do that .
how can two line segments be parallel ?
any pair of points can be connected by a line segment . that 's right . connect two pairs of black points in a way that creates two parallel line segments . so let 's see if we can do that . so i could create one segment that connects this point to this point and then another one that connects this point to this point ...
that 's right . connect two pairs of black points in a way that creates two parallel line segments . so let 's see if we can do that .
can two line segments or two rays be parallel lines , or can only lines be parallel ?
any pair of points can be connected by a line segment . that 's right . connect two pairs of black points in a way that creates two parallel line segments . so let 's see if we can do that . so i could create one segment that connects this point to this point and then another one that connects this point to this point ...
drag the ray so it has an endpoint at a , so we want to make its endpoint at a where the ray terminates and goes through one of the other black points . the ray should also be parallel to the pink line . so i have two options .
a ray can also be a line segment right ?
any pair of points can be connected by a line segment . that 's right . connect two pairs of black points in a way that creates two parallel line segments . so let 's see if we can do that . so i could create one segment that connects this point to this point and then another one that connects this point to this point ...
any pair of points can be connected by a line segment . that 's right .
how and why do lines intercept ?
any pair of points can be connected by a line segment . that 's right . connect two pairs of black points in a way that creates two parallel line segments . so let 's see if we can do that . so i could create one segment that connects this point to this point and then another one that connects this point to this point ...
well , yes , when i do that , it does indeed look like my ray is parallel to the pink line . and this is a ray because it has one endpoint . this is where the ray terminates . it 's an endpoint .
can a ray become parralel with another ray ?
any pair of points can be connected by a line segment . that 's right . connect two pairs of black points in a way that creates two parallel line segments . so let 's see if we can do that . so i could create one segment that connects this point to this point and then another one that connects this point to this point ...
any pair of points can be connected by a line segment . that 's right .
i know a line segment is finite , but could it be stretched so that it is almost infinite ?
any pair of points can be connected by a line segment . that 's right . connect two pairs of black points in a way that creates two parallel line segments . so let 's see if we can do that . so i could create one segment that connects this point to this point and then another one that connects this point to this point ...
that 's right . connect two pairs of black points in a way that creates two parallel line segments . so let 's see if we can do that .
how can two segments be parallel ?
any pair of points can be connected by a line segment . that 's right . connect two pairs of black points in a way that creates two parallel line segments . so let 's see if we can do that . so i could create one segment that connects this point to this point and then another one that connects this point to this point ...
so let 's see if we can do that . so i could create one segment that connects this point to this point and then another one that connects this point to this point . and they look pretty parallel .
another question ; is a 'ray ' only classified as one if it starts at a point , then runs through yet another point ?
any pair of points can be connected by a line segment . that 's right . connect two pairs of black points in a way that creates two parallel line segments . so let 's see if we can do that . so i could create one segment that connects this point to this point and then another one that connects this point to this point ...
let me make these two points parallel . and these are line segments because they have two end points . they each have two end points .
when does a line truly end ?
any pair of points can be connected by a line segment . that 's right . connect two pairs of black points in a way that creates two parallel line segments . so let 's see if we can do that . so i could create one segment that connects this point to this point and then another one that connects this point to this point ...
in fact , i think this is the right answer . if we did it another way , if we had connected that point to that point and this point to this point , then it would n't look so parallel . these clearly , if they were to keep going , they would intersect at some point .
does a ray always have 1 end point ?
any pair of points can be connected by a line segment . that 's right . connect two pairs of black points in a way that creates two parallel line segments . so let 's see if we can do that . so i could create one segment that connects this point to this point and then another one that connects this point to this point ...
so let 's try to make it go through this point . well , yes , when i do that , it does indeed look like my ray is parallel to the pink line . and this is a ray because it has one endpoint .
so you said that parallel lines can never touch , well can there be a parallel and perpendicular line put together ?
any pair of points can be connected by a line segment . that 's right . connect two pairs of black points in a way that creates two parallel line segments . so let 's see if we can do that . so i could create one segment that connects this point to this point and then another one that connects this point to this point ...
let me make these two points parallel . and these are line segments because they have two end points . they each have two end points .
what are some real life line segments , lines or rays that we might see everyday ?
any pair of points can be connected by a line segment . that 's right . connect two pairs of black points in a way that creates two parallel line segments . so let 's see if we can do that . so i could create one segment that connects this point to this point and then another one that connects this point to this point ...
let 's do one more . drag the ray so it has an endpoint at a , so we want to make its endpoint at a where the ray terminates and goes through one of the other black points . the ray should also be parallel to the pink line . so i have two options .
the ray has 2 points but it still goes through so it is still a ray ?
any pair of points can be connected by a line segment . that 's right . connect two pairs of black points in a way that creates two parallel line segments . so let 's see if we can do that . so i could create one segment that connects this point to this point and then another one that connects this point to this point ...
any pair of points can be connected by a line segment . that 's right .
how do i name the intersection of line and plane ?
any pair of points can be connected by a line segment . that 's right . connect two pairs of black points in a way that creates two parallel line segments . so let 's see if we can do that . so i could create one segment that connects this point to this point and then another one that connects this point to this point ...
so let me set it back up the way i did it the first time . let me make these two points parallel . and these are line segments because they have two end points .
but is there proof given that the two lines are parallel ?
any pair of points can be connected by a line segment . that 's right . connect two pairs of black points in a way that creates two parallel line segments . so let 's see if we can do that . so i could create one segment that connects this point to this point and then another one that connects this point to this point ...
that 's right . connect two pairs of black points in a way that creates two parallel line segments . so let 's see if we can do that .
why two line segments are not parallel ?
any pair of points can be connected by a line segment . that 's right . connect two pairs of black points in a way that creates two parallel line segments . so let 's see if we can do that . so i could create one segment that connects this point to this point and then another one that connects this point to this point ...
any pair of points can be connected by a line segment . that 's right .
how many endpoints does a line have ?
any pair of points can be connected by a line segment . that 's right . connect two pairs of black points in a way that creates two parallel line segments . so let 's see if we can do that . so i could create one segment that connects this point to this point and then another one that connects this point to this point ...
it continues forever to the right . so it continues forever in one -- continues forever in one direction .
hello every one , does any one of you know what is perpendicular ?
any pair of points can be connected by a line segment . that 's right . connect two pairs of black points in a way that creates two parallel line segments . so let 's see if we can do that . so i could create one segment that connects this point to this point and then another one that connects this point to this point ...
any pair of points can be connected by a line segment . that 's right .
what points are included on a line segment ?
any pair of points can be connected by a line segment . that 's right . connect two pairs of black points in a way that creates two parallel line segments . so let 's see if we can do that . so i could create one segment that connects this point to this point and then another one that connects this point to this point ...
so let 's see if we can do that . so i could create one segment that connects this point to this point and then another one that connects this point to this point . and they look pretty parallel .
why is the line only have one end point because there are 2 dots ?
any pair of points can be connected by a line segment . that 's right . connect two pairs of black points in a way that creates two parallel line segments . so let 's see if we can do that . so i could create one segment that connects this point to this point and then another one that connects this point to this point ...
in fact , i think this is the right answer . if we did it another way , if we had connected that point to that point and this point to this point , then it would n't look so parallel . these clearly , if they were to keep going , they would intersect at some point .
does a ray always start at a point ?
any pair of points can be connected by a line segment . that 's right . connect two pairs of black points in a way that creates two parallel line segments . so let 's see if we can do that . so i could create one segment that connects this point to this point and then another one that connects this point to this point ...
any pair of points can be connected by a line segment . that 's right .
so does every shape have a symbol ?
any pair of points can be connected by a line segment . that 's right . connect two pairs of black points in a way that creates two parallel line segments . so let 's see if we can do that . so i could create one segment that connects this point to this point and then another one that connects this point to this point ...
well they do n't continue forever . they continue forever in no directions , in zero directions . if it was a ray , it would continue forever in one direction .
why do lines point in zero directions ?