Q34: If , , prove
If , , prove that
Why?
and are both given in terms of a parameter , so first differentiate each with respect to .
By the chain rule, the inner function has derivative :
Why?
For parametric equations,
The two minus signs cancel.
Then multiply both sides by to get the next line.
Why?
Clearing the fraction first is a good idea: the next derivative is then a product rule instead of a quotient rule, and the working is shorter.
Differentiating both sides w.r.t. ,
Why?
The left side is a product, times , so use the product rule.
and are functions of , and is a function of . So by the chain rule
For the left side, take and :
For the right side, : the derivative of with respect to is , so , times .
Putting and multiplying both sides by ,
Why?
is the reciprocal of . Putting it in gives the first line.
Multiplying every term by clears the denominators. The first term becomes , and in the other two terms cancels.
As , and ,
Why?
The result must be in and , so replace every expression in . Use
together with the given and .
Why?
Add to both sides to get the required form with 0 on the right.
. Hence proved.
Chapter 5, Continuity and Differentiability: Second derivative of a parametric function.
Question type: Parametric form + Second derivative (combines 2 types)
How to spot it: click to see
Type 8. Parametric form: and given through or
Spot it: two equations, one for and one for , both in the same third letter.
Here: First, and share : divide by to get , and clear the fraction: .
Type 9. Second derivative: differentiate twice, then prove
Spot it: or in the question, often "prove that ".
Here: Then differentiate that again with respect to , using , and swap , and for , and .
Tell us if something on this page is wrong or unclear. Send feedback on this question →
Continuity and Differentiability in past papers: question 2 of 35 · see them all