Skip to main content

complex - Differentiation of an unknown function


I have to take the partial differentiation of an unknown function. For example, take the unknown function to be $g(x)$. Then it's derivative w.r.t $x$ is $g'(x)$.


By default, Mathematica differentiates the function. I want to keep the result of differentiation as $d(g(x))$ and not $g'(x)$. Is there any way to achieve this?


More precisely, I am using Conjugate[g[x]] as the unknown function and I want the output should be displayed only as d[Conjugate[g[x]] and not as Conjugate'[x]g'[x].


Also, can I handle the conjugate more efficiently than just carrying it all along in the code?




Answer



Edited because the goal was changed in the comment:


This can be done by directly defining the outcome of Derivative when applied to g in the two combinations that you seem to be interested in:


Derivative[1][g][x_] := d[g[x]]

Derivative[1][Conjugate][g[x_]] := Conjugate[d[g[x]]]/d[g[x]];
Derivative[1][Conjugate][d[x_]] := Conjugate[d[d[x]]]/d[d[x]]

Derivative[1][d][x_] := d[d[x]]/d[x];
Derivative[1][d][x_Symbol] := d[d[x]]


On the second line, I used the fact that g is a generic function whose derivative under a Conjugate by default invokes the chain rule. All I do then is to reverse the chain rule by dividing by the factor d[g[x]] that the chain rule will produce. This leaves only the factor I want, and I then replace that by the desired outcome d[Conjugate[g[x]]].


The analogous thing is done for d to allow higher derivatives. The exception is when d[x] is encountered where x is the differentiation variable (which isn't in the question, but I expect may happen). Then there is no chain rule needed, and I therefore specify a separate rule for it with the pattern x_Symbol.


Here is the test:


D[g[x], x]

(* ==> d[g[x]] *)

D[Conjugate[g[x]], x]


(* ==> d[Conjugate[g[x]]] *)

D[g[x], x, x]

(* ==> d[d[g[x]]] *)

D[d[g[x]], x]

(* ==> d[d[g[x]]] *)


D[d[x], x]

(* ==> d[d[x]] *)

D[Conjugate[g[x]], x]

(* ==> Conjugate[d[g[x]]] *)

D[Conjugate[g[x]], x, x]


(* ==> Conjugate[d[d[g[x]]]] *)

Now the remaining issue is to replace the repeated application of d by formatting of the type d^2 g[x] for d[d[g[x]]]. I'll wait to see if this is really desired before doing it.


Comments

Popular posts from this blog

plotting - How to draw lines between specified dots on ListPlot?

I would like to create a plot where I have unconnected dots and some connected. So far, I have figured out how to draw the dots. My code is the following: ListPlot[{{1, 1}, {2, 2}, {3, 3}, {4, 4}, {1, 4}, {2, 5}, {3, 6}, {4, 7}, {1, 7}, {2, 8}, {3, 9}, {4, 10}, {1, 10}, {2, 11}, {3, 12}, {4,13}, {2.5, 7}}, Ticks -> {{1, 2, 3, 4}, None}, AxesStyle -> Thin, TicksStyle -> Directive[Black, Bold, 12], Mesh -> Full] I have thought using ListLinePlot command, but I don't know how to specify to the command to draw only selected lines between the dots. Do have any suggestions/hints on how to do that? Thank you. Answer One possibility would be to use Epilog with Line : ListPlot[ {{1, 1}, {2, 2}, {3, 3}, {4, 4}, {1, 4}, {2, 5}, {3, 6}, {4, 7}, {1, 7}, {2, 8}, {3, 9}, {4, 10}, {1, 10}, {2, 11}, {3, 12}, {4, 13}, {2.5, 7}}, Ticks -> {{1, 2, 3, 4}, None}, AxesStyle -> Thin, TicksStyle -> Directive[Black, Bold, 12], Mesh -> Full, Epilog -> { Line[ ...

equation solving - Invert and fit implicitly defined curve

I need to fit an implicitly defined curve. I thought I could get some data out of Solve , and then using FindFit . Therefore, I would like to find the relation the parametric curve defined by $F(x,y)=0$: Solve[-(1/2) + 1/2 (0.41202 BesselK[0, 0.1 Sqrt[x^2 + y^2]] + (0.101483 x BesselK[1, 0.1 Sqrt[x^2 + y^2]])/Sqrt[x^2 + y^2]) == 0, y] But I can't get an output: Solve was unable to solve the system with inexact coefficients or the system obtained by direct rationalization of inexact numbers present in the system. Since many of the methods used by Solve require exact input, providing Solve with an exact version of the system may help. >> Edit: In particular, I would like to fit the data coming from the curve with the expression of another curve, and not with a function $f(x)$. In particular, since this clearly looks like a cardioid , I would like it to fit to something like it. What other strategies could I try?

dynamic - How can I make a clickable ArrayPlot that returns input?

I would like to create a dynamic ArrayPlot so that the rectangles, when clicked, provide the input. Can I use ArrayPlot for this? Or is there something else I should have to use? Answer ArrayPlot is much more than just a simple array like Grid : it represents a ranged 2D dataset, and its visualization can be finetuned by options like DataReversed and DataRange . These features make it quite complicated to reproduce the same layout and order with Grid . Here I offer AnnotatedArrayPlot which comes in handy when your dataset is more than just a flat 2D array. The dynamic interface allows highlighting individual cells and possibly interacting with them. AnnotatedArrayPlot works the same way as ArrayPlot and accepts the same options plus Enabled , HighlightCoordinates , HighlightStyle and HighlightElementFunction . data = {{Missing["HasSomeMoreData"], GrayLevel[ 1], {RGBColor[0, 1, 1], RGBColor[0, 0, 1], GrayLevel[1]}, RGBColor[0, 1, 0]}, {GrayLevel[0], GrayLevel...