bingliantech

Content Count
7 
Joined

Last visited
Posts posted by bingliantech


OK,no problem,i considered M which is {y_{1},y_{2},y_{3}..y_{p}...}⊂M as codomain in the past,i can understand your steps and i think i can understand partial derivative.
0 
In particular he has mixed the vector based approach with the traditional geometric one, omitting important parts of both.
We can discuss this further if you wish.
Are you familiar with the vector dot product?
Yes,i found Strang's linear algebra is very good and it's the reason why i want reading his calculus carefully.
I generally read his linear algebra several days ago so i think i may have the basic understanding of vector dot product.
Could you tell me the omiting parts ?I can understand △f should be devided by △s,it's not difiicult to be understood,i just be puzzled with his reason or his explanation.
to imatfaal
It's a good idea to watch the video of lecture,but i don't listen english often,maybe i can make a try.
Thank you!
0 
Thank you very much, just as you said, the authour may want to say if we divide △f by △x , we will get root 2* △f/△s for limit,only △f/△s is right, i am not very customed with the expression in the last paragragh.
Thanks a lot for studiot and imatfaal's help and these paragraphs come from strang's "calculus".
0 
Thank you for your reply, i can understand what you have said as i can understand the first three paragraghs in the picture,but the last paragraph puzzle me,i can't get why the square root of 2 going to enter shows that dividing delta f by delta x is wrong.
0 

how to delete the topic？
0
one question about the substitution in multiple integrals
in Analysis and Calculus
Posted