LinkBack URL
About LinkBacksI ran across the following in a book, but I don't quite understand why we have fx+p fz=0 (and similarly with y). A little guidance would be greatly appreciated.
The assumptions is that z is a function of both x and y, that isOriginally Posted by Hal2001
I ran across the following in a book, but I don't quite understand why we have fx+p fz=0 (and similarly with y). A little guidance would be greatly appreciated.
Now just use the chain rule
This reduces to
,a,b)= \frac{\partial f}{\partial x}+\frac{\partial f}{\partial z}\frac{\partial z}{\partial x} =0)
  |
got it thanks. Didn't realize at the time that they were defining z as a function of x and y. But it makes sense now.
