Calculus/Exponential functions are not powers of x.
Expert: Paul Klarreich - 1/17/2007
Questionright out of our beautiful grade 12 calculus course..
my question is - for functions like x^2, etc. where the variable is the base, we can use chain rule to differentiate. So why then, if the variable is in the exponent can chain rule not also be used? I mean, why does the derivative of 2^x not equal x(2^(x-1))? Instead it = 2^x*ln2. Is there some element of the chain rule in there that I'm missing, or is it just a rule that everyone has to know, that exponential functions equal themselves * ln of the base * derivative of the exponent. Some kind of explanation would be AWEsome. thanks a lot.
AnswerQuestioner: Andrea
Category: Calculus
Subject: exponential functions
Question: right out of our beautiful grade 12 calculus course..
my question is - for functions like x^2, etc. where the variable is the base, we can use chain rule to differentiate. So why then, if the variable is in the exponent can chain rule not also be used? I mean, why does the derivative of 2^x not equal x(2^(x-1))? Instead it = 2^x*ln2. Is there some element of the chain rule in there that I'm missing, or is it just a rule that everyone has to know, that exponential functions equal themselves * ln of the base * derivative of the exponent. Some kind of explanation would be AWEsome. thanks a lot.
....................................................
Hi, Andrea,
A function like
y = x^2,
which is a (simple example of a) polynomial, is a completely different animal from:
y = 2^x,
which is an exponential function.
Why can't you use one rule for the other? The simple answer is that your rule:
D(x^n) = n x^n-1
took a lot of work to derive, and you will, no doubt, recall the steps. You would have to recall the steps if anyone asked you:
"How come the x^n rule above works for all values of n, including negative numbers, and including fractions like p/q, so we can do roots?"
You would have to say:
A. We derived the special case of the rule for n being a positive integer this way:
(x + h)^n - x^n
f'(x) = lim ----------------
h->0 h
and expanded using the binomial theorem and obtained the limit. It came out to nx^n-1.
B. We derived the quotient rule, then applied it to something like
f(x) = x^-k, using n = -k.
We wrote that f(x) = 1/x^k, then used the quotient rule. After all the smoke cleared we found that the x^n rule was still good.
C. We learned about implicit differentiation and the chain rule. Then we could take n = 1/k, which means the k-th root of x. We could write:
y = x^1/k, then y^k = x, use implicit differentiation, and again, when the smoke clears, the x^n rule still stands.
D. We can do it for n = p/q using the chain rule again. The x^n rule keeps on working. (Sounds like a commercial.)
E. What about something like x^sqrt(2). That's not a rational exponent, but we can use certain continuity arguments to extend it.
So we did a lot of work to prove the x^n rule applies to many different kinds of exponents. BUT EVERY ONE OF THEM WAS A CONSTANT. At no time did we ever apply the x^n rule to a case where the exponent was a variable.
So the simple answer to "Why can't we use the x^n rule on 2^x" is: "We never proved that we could, and we don't go around applying some rule unless we know it applies."
......................................
So how DO we get something for the derivative of 2^x? The following is an outline of what you will see in your calculus text:
A. We start with this limit:
lim (1 + h)^(1/h) = e.
h->0
B. We find the derivative of e^x in this way:
e^(x + h) - e^x
f'(x) = lim ---------------
h->0 h
and find a way to compute the limit (the derivative) using the limit in A. You find that if f(x) = e^x, then f'(x) = e^x. [The amazing indestructible function.]
C. For other exponential functions, such as 2^x, you write 2 = e^(ln 2) and use other derivative and exponent properties to work out the answer.
I hope that by working this out, you will begin to see the real beauty of the 12th grade calculus course you are experiencing.