The **implicitdiff** command can be used to find derivatives of
implicitly defined functions. Suppose we wanted to use implicit
differentiation to find
for the relation

Then we first define our relation and give it a label for later use.

> f:=x^2*y^2+y^3=0;

The syntax of the

> implicitdiff(f,y,x);

The result of the command is the implicit derivative, . The syntax of this command is very similar to that of the

Second derivatives can also be taken with **implicitdiff**. The
following command computes
.

> implicitdiff(f,y,x,x);

To compute numerical values of derivatives obtained by implicit differentiation, you have to use the subs command. For example, to find the value of at the point you could use the following command.

> subs({x=1,y=-1},implicitdiff(f,y,x));

Sometimes you want the value of a derivative, but first have to find the coordinates of the point. More than likely, you will have to use the

> with(plots):Here is an example of using this command to plot the hyperbola . Note that you have to specify both an range and a range. This is because the

> implicitplot(x^2-y^2=1,x=-3..3,y=3..3);To get a good graph with this command, you usually have to experiment with the ranges. For example the following command

> implicitplot(f,x=-1..1,y=1..2);produces an empty plot. The reason is simply that there are no solutions to with . This is easy to see if you rewrite the equation as and recognize that both sides of the equation must be nonnegative. Usually a good strategy to follow is to start with fairly large ranges, for example to for both variables, and then refine them based on what you see.

This command can also have problems if the relation in question has solution branches that cross or are too close together. For example, try the following command.

> implicitplot(f,x=-1..1,y=-1..0);For less than about , you should see the two smooth curves. However, for values of closer to zero the two curves become jagged. To understand this, we need to take a closer look at the relation we tried to plot. The key is to notice that we can factor out and write our relation as follows.

This makes it clear that the graph of the relation really has two pieces: and . These two curves intersect at the origin, which explains why

As our last example, consider the relation . Try the following commands to see what a part of the graph of this relation looks like.

> g := x^2*sin(y)=1;

> implicitplot(g,x=-4..4,y=-10..10);Suppose you were asked to find the slope of the graph of this relation at , but you were only given that the value of was about 9. Using the plot, it is relatively easy to find this derivative by first using

> y_sol := fsolve(subs(x=2,g),y,y=8..10);

> evalf(subs({x=2,y=y_sol},implicitdiff(g,y,x )));

- Find the slope of the graph of at the point . Supply a plot of the graph that includes the point in question.
- For the relation
from the first exercise, find
the second derivative
at the point
.
- Consider the relation
.
- Use the
`implicitplot`command and/or any other technique to determine what the graph of this relation looks like. How many separate branches does the graph contain? - Find at the point(s) on the graph where .
- Are there any points on the graph where the derivative is undefined because the tangent line is vertical? If so, find them. (Hint - if the tangent line is vertical, what is true about ?)

- Use the

2000-10-03