Mathematics Stack Exchange is a question and answer site for people studying math at any level and professionals in related fields. Join them; it only takes a minute:

Sign up
Here's how it works:
  1. Anybody can ask a question
  2. Anybody can answer
  3. The best answers are voted up and rise to the top

Please take a look here: picture of the question

Assume I want to decide the sign of $\frac{dz}{dt}|_{t=1} $ (and not t=2). As far as I can see: At $t=1$ i think that the derivative is positive... this is because the $x'(1)=0 ,y'(1)>0$ and $ z_y(3,0) > 0 $ . In one of my previous posts, Babak S. said he thinks I'm right.

On the other hand, at the point $(3,0) $ , the gradient must be perpendicular to the corresponding level set, so it must point towards the positive region of the x-axis, which means that the y'th-coordinate term of the gradient vector must be $0$ and thus $\frac{dz}{dt}|_{t=1} = 0$ ...

Can someone please explain to me what am I getting wrong here?

share|cite|improve this question
up vote 0 down vote accepted

Why do you say $z_y(3,0) > 0$? As you observed correctly in your second paragraph, the gradient is in the $x$-direction at $(3,0)$, so $z_y(3,0) = 0$.

share|cite|improve this answer
Because when walking from (3,0) to the positive direction of the $y$-axis, we ascend and not stay at the same place... – czash Jun 6 '13 at 7:27
At $(3,0)$ the contour line is also in the $y$ direction, so (to first order) you are walking along the contour line, i.e. $dz/dt=0$. – Anthony Carapetis Jun 6 '13 at 7:36
BAHHH...Thanks a lot :( – czash Jun 6 '13 at 7:45

Your Answer


By posting your answer, you agree to the privacy policy and terms of service.

Not the answer you're looking for? Browse other questions tagged or ask your own question.