An implicit differentiation question dealt with . Differentiating it is easy enough for a competent A-level student - but what does the curve look like? That requires a bit more thought.
My usual approach to sketching a function uses a structure I call DATAS:
- Domain: where is the function defined?
- Axes: where does the function cross them?
- Turning points: where are the function’s critical points?
- Asymptotes: what happens when or get really big?
- Shape: what does the graph look like overall?
As it turns out, this approach is almost entirely useless here: we’re not even looking at a function! It’s not at all clear from first inspection what values are consistent with , setting reveals that the curve doesn’t cross the -axis (although leads to , which at least gives us a couple of points on the curve.) Critical points? The gradient is never zero.
Asymptotes are a bit more helpful: as and get enormous, the curve approaches , which looks like , but reflected in both axes.
But still, there’s not really anything to build a shape on. Instead, I’m going to have to do some Actual Maths.
The first thing I notice is that I’ve got and in there, which suggests I might be able to complete the square to get it into a nicer form. Indeed, it sorts itself out fairly nicely as , with a little bit of work. But how to sketch that?
Let’s play with the variables a bit. If I call the bracket on the left , just to see what happens, I get . That’s a hyperbola, crossing the -axis when , and approaching the lines as gets large. Now it’s just a case of transforming.
Now, if I let , I’ve got - so I can transform from -space to -space by shifting the graph “down” by , which I suppose is a shear. The easiest way for me to picture this is to consider how the asymptotes move: the one that was becomes , which remains a positive gradient, but only just. The other, , becomes much steeper, .
The overall effect on the hyperbola is to push it downwards on the right and upwards on the left - with the crest on the left above the -axis and the one on the right below.
One last transformation! We need to replace with . Clearly, only takes on positive values, so we can ignore anything below the -axis. On the right, things are simple: instead of approaching the straight line, the ‘hyperbola’ now approaches a pair of square root curves. It’s symmetrical about the -axis, and is vertical when it crosses (at , as previously mentioned.)
On the left is where things get interesting! The part of the -space curve above the -axis doubles back on itself - which means the -space curve does the same thing, but now with a reflection below the axis. The curve is vertical when and when (as it crosses the axis), making a sort of 3 shape to the left of the -axis.
And we’re done! I think it looks like a fish smoking a cigar, but others suggest less innocent interpretations.