A product as a rectangle
Let y = uv, where u and v are both functions of x. Picture the product as the area of a rectangle, u wide and v tall. When x grows by a small step , u grows by and v grows by , and the rectangle grows to .
The new area is the old one plus three pieces: a strip down one side, a strip along the top, and a small corner where the two strips meet.
A u by v rectangle grown a little in each direction. It gains a strip along each side, and , and a small corner .
The corner vanishes
Multiplying out, , so the growth in y is . Divide by the step : .
Now let tend to 0. tends to u' and tends to v'. In the last term, tends to u' but tends to 0, because v has a derivative and is therefore continuous. So the corner term tends to u' × 0 = 0. What is left is the product rule: (uv)' = u'v + uv'.
In words: differentiate u and keep v, then keep u and differentiate v, and add. In Leibniz's notation, .
the two strips shrink in proportion to Δu and Δv, but the corner Δu·Δv shrinks faster, so it vanishes from the derivative; here it is 18.6%
Shrink both changes until the corner is under 5% of the growth
A 4 by 3 rectangle grown by and . The strips are and , and the corner is 1.6 × 1.6 = 2.56, about 18.6% of the growth. Drag both handles down to 0.2: the strips shrink to 0.8 and 0.6, but the corner, a small amount times a small amount, shrinks to 0.04, under 3% of the growth.
A check against the power rule
Take , with u = x and . Then u' = 1 and , so the product rule gives . The product is , and the power rule gives too.
Take , with and . The rule gives . The product is , and the power rule gives again.
Not the product of the derivatives
It is tempting to differentiate each factor and multiply: (uv)' = u'v'. That is wrong, and one example is enough to show it. For , the derivatives of the factors are 2x and , whose product is . At x = 2 that is 48. But , whose derivative is 80 at x = 2, and the chord from x = 2 with h = 0.001 gives . The answer is 80, not 48.
The simplest case shows it too. For , the derivative is 2x, but 1 × 1 = 1. Each term of the product rule keeps one factor whole, and the product of the two derivatives keeps neither.
The rule works for any two factors that have derivatives, such as and sin x on the rectangle below: once the derivative of each factor is known, the derivative of the product is the first factor's derivative times the second factor, plus the first factor times the second factor's derivative.
the true increase is two strips of length x, so (uv)′ = 2x = 4; the fallacy u′v′ = 1 accounts for one unit of it and misses 2x − 1 = 3
Take x to 4 and compare the true increase with u′v′
A square of side x, so u = v = x and . Growing x by adds two strips, each , so the true rate is 2x. The u'v' guess, 1 × 1 = 1, accounts for one unit of strip, shaded on its own. Drag x to the right: the true rate grows with x and the guess stays at 1.
The rectangle with sides and sin x. When x grows, one strip is sin x times the growth of , and the other is times the growth of sin x: two terms, one for each factor.
Products of polynomials and roots
For , take and v = 3x − 2, so u' = 2x and v' = 3. The rule gives . Check by expanding first: , which differentiates to . At x = 1 that is 8, and the chord with h = 0.001 gives 8.007003.
For , take and v = x + 1, so and v' = 1. The rule gives . At x = 4 that is , and the chord with h = 0.001 gives 3.250172.
A constant factor is a factor too. For , with u = 5 and , the rule gives , the same as keeping the 5 as a multiplier. And three factors give three terms, each with one factor differentiated: for that is .
The usual mistakes
Multiplying the two derivatives. For that gives 1 × 2x = 2x, but the derivative of is : .
Writing only one term. For , differentiating alone gives ; the factor x contributes its own term, , and the answer is .
Subtracting the two terms. A minus sign belongs to the quotient rule; for a product, both pieces of growth add.
Leaving the product undifferentiated: answering for the derivative of . That is the product itself.
A bakery
In the application below, a bakery lowers its price and sells more loaves each week, so its takings are a product of two changing quantities, price times loaves sold. The product rule gives the rate the takings change, and setting it to 0 finds the week the takings are steady.
Worked example: A Bakery Lowering Its Price Week by Week: the Rate Its Takings Change When Both Factors Move
Question A bakery lowers the price of its sourdough loaves week by week. In week x the price is p = 4 − 0.1x dollars a loaf and the number sold is q = 200 + 20x loaves. The takings for the week are R = pq dollars. (a) At what rate are the takings changing in week 4? (b) In which week are the takings momentarily steady?
1.Let x be the number of the week. The price is p = 4 − 0.1x dollars and the number sold is q = 200 + 20x loaves, so the takings are R = pq dollars.
The takings are the price times the number sold, and both change from week to week: R = pq. 2.Differentiate each factor on its own. Both are linear, so dpdx = −0.1 and dqdx = 20.
Each factor is linear, so dpdx = −0.1 dollars a week and dqdx = 20 loaves a week. 3.Apply the product rule: dRdx = dpdxq + pdqdx = −0.1(200 + 20x) + 20(4 − 0.1x).
The product rule gives dRdx = −0.1(200 + 20x) + 20(4 − 0.1x) = 60 − 4x. 4.Expand and collect the terms: −20 − 2x + 80 − 2x = 60 − 4x dollars a week.
At week 4 the tangent has a rise of 88 for a run of 2: a gradient of 44. 5.(a) In week 4 the rate is 60 − 4 × 4 = 44, so the takings are rising at $44 a week.
(a) In week 4 the takings are rising at $44 a week. 6.(b) The takings are momentarily steady when 60 − 4x = 0, which gives x = 15. Check: the takings are $1248 in week 14, $1250 in week 15 and $1248 in week 16.
(b) 60 − 4x = 0 at x = 15, where the curve is flat and the takings are momentarily steady.
Answer: (a) The takings are rising at $44 a week; (b) week 15
Common mistakes
- Differentiating the two factors and multiplying the results, giving −0.1 × 20 = −2. The derivative of a product is not the product of the derivatives: each factor is differentiated in turn while the other is left as it stands.
- Reading a falling price as falling takings. The price drops by $0.10 a week while the number sold rises by 20 loaves, and until week 15 the second effect is the larger of the two.
More rules of differentiation problems, worked step by step →