Talk:Differential calculus

message: This article could use a smoother, less-technical intro. --DanielCD 21:52, 21 October 2005 (UTC)
thread_title: Introduction

message: This article used to redirect to, firstly Calculus and then Derivative, before it was started again in its present unreadable form. The section "Differential calculus" in the Calculus article, mentions main article as Derivative, which is thoroughly readable. I suggest the two articles be merged. However, I don't know which name would be better to keep - possibly "Differential calculus" seeing as this is the mathematical process? Cormaggio @ 14:47, 11 November 2005 (UTC)
thread_title:  Merge 

message: As discussed on Talk:Derivative, Differential calculus is being turned into the lead article for (surprise!) :Category:Differential calculus.  It will not focus on the derivative operator (as the old differential calculus article did), but instead on history and applications.  The present version is mostly grabbed from the present derivative article, plus some additions (mostly the sketch of the derivative operator).  141.211.62.20 03:28, 28 July 2007 (UTC)
thread_title:  New version 

message: This has a textbook tone! Needs to be fixed :) Uxorion 23:11, 10 August 2007 (UTC)
replies: text: Go for it.  :-)  141.211.120.81 23:41, 10 August 2007 (UTC)
thread_title:  Oh dear 

message: At the beginning of this article is a statement that for a straight ine, delta y/delta x = m, the slope of the line. The "proof" of this statement casnnot be derived without assuming the statement is true. The same logical error (the identical text)appears in the article "differential equation". My guess is that something was lost while changing the article from earlier versions.
Something that seems to be ignored in mathematical articles is that those who look them up, are not familiar with their contents. Those are the people we are trying to help.Don Seib 20:18, 6 October 2009 (UTC)
thread_title:  Circular proof 

message: The reference to Ian Pearce should be removed.  Tkuvho (talk) 10:29, 17 May 2011 (UTC)
thread_title:  Ian Pearce 

message: This article has been edited by a user who is known to have misused sources to unduly promote certain views (see WP:Jagged 85 cleanup). Examination of the sources used by this editor often reveals that the sources have been selectively interpreted or blatantly misrepresented, going beyond any reasonable interpretation of the authors' intent.
Please help by viewing the entry for this article shown at the page, and check the edits to ensure that any claims are valid, and that any references do in fact verify what is claimed. 
I searched the page history, and found 3 edits by Jagged 85 (for example, see this edits). Tobby72 (talk) 20:22, 20 January 2012 (UTC)
thread_title: Misuse of sources

message: I don't understand the ill. at the top of the article.  Why is that particular tangent the derivative?  There are lots of other possible tangents to the curve.  Why is that one "privileged"? 211.225.33.104 (talk) 16:01, 4 May 2014 (UTC)
replies: text: The slope of that tangent line is the derivative of the function at the marked point.  The function has many, many derivatives, one for each point.  The only reason for singling out this particular point, this particular derivative, and this particular tangent is because it makes a nice illustration.  Ozob (talk) 16:08, 4 May 2014 (UTC)
thread_title:  tangent 

message: This is a stub about differential calculus that does not need its own article and is on the abandoned articles page. Ethanpet113 (talk) 07:34, 31 October 2018 (UTC)
replies: text: We have also  that redirects to Ordinary differential equation. This target and the proposed merged article do not contain any explicit definition of the concept. As "constant coefficients" is generally used for linear differential equations only, and as Linear differential equation contains a definition and several sections about equations with constant coefficients, I'll be bold and redirect  and Constant coefficients to this article. D.Lazard (talk) 09:37, 31 October 2018 (UTC)
thread_title:  Proposed merge with [[Constant coefficients]] 

message: We have:
: He proved, for example, that the maximum of the cubic ax2 – x3 occurs when x = 2a/3, and concluded therefrom that the equation ax2 — x3 = c has exactly one positive solution when c = 4a3/27, and two positive solutions whenever 0 < c < 4a3/27.[9] The historian of science, Roshdi Rashed,[10] has argued that al-Tūsī must have used the derivative of the cubic to obtain this result.
But "proved" doesn't make sense: if we don't know how he obtained the result, we don't know he had a proof. Presumably it was just a "this is the answer" type of thing William M. Connolley (talk) 09:44, 21 October 2021 (UTC)
replies: text: I have replaced "proved" by "obtained". I have also avoided the minus sign in the equation, as it seems an anachronism (AFIK, negative numbers were unknown at Tusi's time). Also, I have added "(for positive )" after "maximum", as, otherwise, the function does not have a (global) maximum. D.Lazard (talk) 11:13, 21 October 2021 (UTC)
thread_title:  Tusi 

message: I have started a discussion of possible interest to followers of this page at Wikipedia talk:WikiProject Mathematics#Articles on "differential calculus" and "integral calculus". --Trovatore (talk) 19:10, 27 December 2021 (UTC)
thread_title:  Discussion 

message: i have removed the claim that aryabhata knew about early differential calculus since the reference doesn't mention anything about calculus in aryabhata work David dclork li (talk) 07:59, 22 April 2023 (UTC)
thread_title:  Aryabhatta