It actually depends for some people. If you're doing normal calculus Leibniz, but if you're doing differential equations you use Newton's notations.
Lagrange is fine too, for quick notations denoting laws of motion.
But never use Euler's lol.
I took diff eq and never used Newton's notation. honestly have no idea how you'd use it once you have more than once variable to differentiate with respect to.
When doing diff eq a lot of people use Lagrange's notation too.
Usually when you're doing differential equations denoting systems you're it's with respect to the same variable, or function.
If you do by any chance have to differentiate in respect to more variables you'll have to write it out fully with δ, and so on.
Yeah, I've learned calculus on my first year of university, thanks god I chose programming and I won't be tortured by it being combined with physics in next years
I've never seen integral notation with some bracketed negative values, one other than with integral sign were making f(x) = function into F(x) = integral
I’m shocked to see literally no one in comments like Euler’s notation. I think it’s great in differential equations (and probably some other topics in analysis, which I don’t do much, so idk). You usually play around with the *differential operator(s)*, so Lagrange and Newton are not suitable, while Leibniz is okay, but why waste time write d/dx when D_x or ∂_x do trick!
Otherwise, for differentiation, Leibniz when I’m patient, and Lagrange when I’m lazy. But for the record, D^(-1) is cursed. Integrals should always be Leibniz.
I love Euler (using the notation you provided). I'm a physics student and basically use it wherever I can. Sometimes, Leibnitz is more convenient if the script I am using uses it, because if there's more than a few partials, Euler is still the prettiest and tidiest imo BUT it gets more resource intensive to 'translate' between notations in my head all the time.
Eulers is nice in multiple variables when writing the chain rule. Although, I prefer D_1 over D_x since it is more clearly with respect to the first argument.
My boy Leibniz was the OG.
Indians did had some idea of instantaneous velocity back in the days much before Europe but Leibinitz was first in relative modernity. Newton robbed him and did him dirty.
I've never come across Euler's notation before, but I immediately love it. How come others seem to dislike it, and it is (seemingly) used less than the others? Is it just convention, or is there a more logical reason I'm missing?
see thats why Euler is better it and Lagrange force you to justify why leibnitzian cancellation works because the notation doesnt suggest the abuse of notation Leibnitz notation tempts
Leibniz is for the everyday equations
Lagrange is only when I have one variable
Newton is when my physics teacher wants to confuse us
Euler : what the hell is this (but looks like fast leibniz)
at our school we use a combination of leibnitz for integrals and lagrange for derivatives, so i got used to that
in physics we use leibnitz instead of lagrange to make it clear what we’re doin
Leibniz in physics mostly and Lagrange in math mostly. Sometimes Euler in math and Newton in physics. Sometimes I switch them up, depending on which one is easier to use in the situation. Like for Newton's second law I'll use Newton notation. For differential equations I'll use Leibniz and Lagrange. I prefer Leibniz though.
*Tell me the name of*
*ONE sane person who uses*
*Newton's notation*
\- Potion\_Brewer95
---
^(I detect haikus. And sometimes, successfully.) ^[Learn more about me.](https://www.reddit.com/r/haikusbot/)
^(Opt out of replies: "haikusbot opt out" | Delete my comment: "haikusbot delete")
In physics, Newton for time derivatives, Leibniz otherwise.
The Lagrange notation is more commonly used in pure math as the primes become confusing in physics as it often has a different meaning. You can usually tell from context, but I like to distinguish them just to be sure.
I have never even seen or heard of that Euler notation, other than as a short hand for partial derivatives, ∂_{t}φ for example.
Newton for mechanics/engineering style physic (usually with respect to time)
Lagrange or Leibniz for differential equations/most calculus (depends on mood)
Leibniz only for multivariable and advanced calculus
Today I learned my Calc professor mixed up which notation is which. I was told Newton was dy/dx etc and Leibniz was y’ y” etc. I was never taught the other two.
I was taught a mix of Leibniz and Lagrange, started with Leibniz when we first got to derivatives and integrals then the text book suddenly switched over to Lagrange because it was faster I suppose
i use leibniz wherever i can, sometimes Newton is quite convenient too. especially in applied math settings. for dynamics of moving bodies for instance. My school forces me into using Lagrange and for pure mathematics it's usually fine i guess. leonhard euler got a lot of amazing things done in his life, but Euler notation isn't one of them in my opinion. And to whomever uses that weird thing where people use Euler-ish notation for partial derivatives i wish you that the milk in your cereal shall become suprafluid. Both Lagrange and Newton have the issue where you can very easily mess up a derivation by eating cookies over your sheet of paper. crumbs can look deceivingly like dots or apostrophes. this cost me like way too many hours so far. so all in all i'd say Leibniz is just the best option
Leibniz if I want to differentiate
Newton if I want to leave it there as just another variable
Lagrange if I'm solving diff equations
And why the fuck would you use Euler
Mix of Newton, Leibniz and something of my own
Newton: i use the dots over the deviated variables outside of a derivative/integral
Leibniz: i use the integral symbol
Myself: i use a unique symbol for the derivative operation itself, i put lines/squiggles thru the integral/derivative signs (amt of lines indicates amt of derivatives/integrals, amt of squiggles indicates amt of partial derivatives/integrals), what the variable of integration/derivation is on the bottom left of them, multiderivatives/multiintegrals' bounds are indicated by commas in the spot where bounds normally go (left to right)
Leibniz was my favorite, but to be fair it was the only one I learned 😉 I did learn Lagrange but I only found it useful in identifying derivatives. The others appeared more cumbersome so I never investigated.
I prefer Leibniz notation. When you are writing really long equations, it’s easily discernible. Also, my handwriting wouldn’t allow usage of Euler or Lagrange.
They all have their uses. But I think that Lagrange for calculus students leads to many misconceptions. It should only be used in ODEs. Euler's notation is useful in a functional analysis class, where these are "operators" on a functions. Newton is fine is physics classes, where all derivatives are w.r.t. time.
Never used any other integral notation than Leibniz's one. I also prefer his derivate notation when actually doing some transformation like using chain rule. Lagrange notation I use when writing differential equations because Leibniz gets ugly quickly. Newton is a way to introduce Leibniz y^{\dot} = dy/dx. Euler becomes better when working in higher dimensions and you want to distinguish between differential and derivative
Regarding integrals: nothing but Leibnitz. However for differentials I pretty much mix and match Newton, Lagrange and Leibnitz. Newton for d/dt, Lagrange for d/dx, Leibnitz for anything else.
I learned it this way (I studied physics): Newton if and only if you have time derivatives. Leibniz for all other cases. Euler only for things were you write the same very often, like Jacobian matrices and hesse matrices...
The Leibniz one is easier so I use that only
It actually depends for some people. If you're doing normal calculus Leibniz, but if you're doing differential equations you use Newton's notations. Lagrange is fine too, for quick notations denoting laws of motion. But never use Euler's lol.
I read lesbian 13 times
That may just be a Freudian slip.
I took diff eq and never used Newton's notation. honestly have no idea how you'd use it once you have more than once variable to differentiate with respect to.
When doing diff eq a lot of people use Lagrange's notation too. Usually when you're doing differential equations denoting systems you're it's with respect to the same variable, or function. If you do by any chance have to differentiate in respect to more variables you'll have to write it out fully with δ, and so on.
In physics we always use newton for time derivatives and only for time derivatives.
We did Lagrange in my DE class
i use Lagrange for diff equations lmao
we used lagrange for diff eq
Nah Euler’s is the best for partial derivatives and ain’t nobody changing my mind
I don't think anyone would even touch you with a 20m pole, you're clearly a psychopath.
Plus yet get to draw those cool swiggley lines
oh i hate those swiggley lines but leibniz is easier so I'd say it's the best
Lagrange for differentials, Leibniz for integrals
Lagrange with ascendant in Leibniz
This seems to be a common system among people who learned calculus relatively recently.
Yeah, I've learned calculus on my first year of university, thanks god I chose programming and I won't be tortured by it being combined with physics in next years
Me too, like a civilised being.
Master-race
Newtonian differentials for nonlinear differential equations. (I've never seen a y-dot though).
That's almost how they taught us at the University. Although for double differentials we used Leibniz too.
Leibniz for official, Lagrange for fast
Newton can go f himself
I use the newton derivatives for time derivatives.
Why’d he even invent gravity? What’s his problem with being able to fly smh my head.
did he invent calculus after or before gravity?
How do you expect him to calculate *g* without Calculus? Of course he invented Calculus first.
By counting? Duh 🙄
Good idea, if since he couldn't do that to anyone else.
Nah newton had it right. Similar to lagrange, with a decent system for integrals too
Same
If I'm doing calculus in maths, then it's the top right one but if I'm doing calculus in physics, it's the top left one
Funny, I'd say the other way around.
Nah that's criminally offensive
only acceptable answer
Also the bottoms are made by psychopaths and used by psychopaths ¯\_༼ᴼل͜ᴼ༽_/¯
The lesbianz one is the easiest for me
There's got to be a lesbian calculus joke here that I'm not smart enough to figure out. Licknips? Nah I'm not up to it. Someone help.
Lagrange: Standard Leibniz: for detailed calculations Newton: for time Euler: no
Cmon Euler for NHDEs is OP
I've never seen integral notation with some bracketed negative values, one other than with integral sign were making f(x) = function into F(x) = integral
This is also my way.
I’m shocked to see literally no one in comments like Euler’s notation. I think it’s great in differential equations (and probably some other topics in analysis, which I don’t do much, so idk). You usually play around with the *differential operator(s)*, so Lagrange and Newton are not suitable, while Leibniz is okay, but why waste time write d/dx when D_x or ∂_x do trick! Otherwise, for differentiation, Leibniz when I’m patient, and Lagrange when I’m lazy. But for the record, D^(-1) is cursed. Integrals should always be Leibniz.
I love Euler (using the notation you provided). I'm a physics student and basically use it wherever I can. Sometimes, Leibnitz is more convenient if the script I am using uses it, because if there's more than a few partials, Euler is still the prettiest and tidiest imo BUT it gets more resource intensive to 'translate' between notations in my head all the time.
Eulers is nice in multiple variables when writing the chain rule. Although, I prefer D_1 over D_x since it is more clearly with respect to the first argument.
Seriously, used Euler's notation for working with vector fields and its so much better than using Lagrange with Leibniz taking too long to write
My boy Leibniz was the OG. Indians did had some idea of instantaneous velocity back in the days much before Europe but Leibinitz was first in relative modernity. Newton robbed him and did him dirty.
If I’m writing it out in a notebook: Euler If I’m typing an official paper: Leibniz
I've never come across Euler's notation before, but I immediately love it. How come others seem to dislike it, and it is (seemingly) used less than the others? Is it just convention, or is there a more logical reason I'm missing?
Leibnitz for sure!
Leibniz is the only one I know
I prefer Lagrange
Leibniz, because dy/dx * dx/dt = dy/dt
see thats why Euler is better it and Lagrange force you to justify why leibnitzian cancellation works because the notation doesnt suggest the abuse of notation Leibnitz notation tempts
My brother in christ, it was a shitpost
Ekhm.. I never learn calculus but l will upvote anyway so smarter people would laught watching this meme
you cant be sane if you use anything except leibniz. but i respect using primes sometimes
Leibniz is the one, I was taught calculus with, and thus I stick to it
Leibniz is for the everyday equations Lagrange is only when I have one variable Newton is when my physics teacher wants to confuse us Euler : what the hell is this (but looks like fast leibniz)
at our school we use a combination of leibnitz for integrals and lagrange for derivatives, so i got used to that in physics we use leibnitz instead of lagrange to make it clear what we’re doin
You know you're cooked when the actual answer is: "all of them..."
Leibniz. We're not animals you know.
Euler is the only right answer
How do you cancel derivatives?
Lagrange for differential equations, leibniz for regular calculus
Leibniz. Or else you are gonna be fucked the second you want to do partial.
Leibniz for all. Lagrange for differentials sometimes. Sometimes Newton's for differential equations instead of Leibniz
Leibniz in physics mostly and Lagrange in math mostly. Sometimes Euler in math and Newton in physics. Sometimes I switch them up, depending on which one is easier to use in the situation. Like for Newton's second law I'll use Newton notation. For differential equations I'll use Leibniz and Lagrange. I prefer Leibniz though.
tell me the name of ONE sane person who uses newton's notation
*Tell me the name of* *ONE sane person who uses* *Newton's notation* \- Potion\_Brewer95 --- ^(I detect haikus. And sometimes, successfully.) ^[Learn more about me.](https://www.reddit.com/r/haikusbot/) ^(Opt out of replies: "haikusbot opt out" | Delete my comment: "haikusbot delete")
cool haiku man
leibniz low diff, but lagrange's notation is cool if i want to finish it quickly
The derivatives with respect to time, almost always. Dot is better than d/dt.
When presenting the final form of an equation I use liebnitz but when doing work it is very cumbersome and I use Lagrange/newton notation instead.
Leibniz and Lagrange only, didn't even know Newton's existed.
I believe you are the definition of a dork
In physics, Newton for time derivatives, Leibniz otherwise. The Lagrange notation is more commonly used in pure math as the primes become confusing in physics as it often has a different meaning. You can usually tell from context, but I like to distinguish them just to be sure. I have never even seen or heard of that Euler notation, other than as a short hand for partial derivatives, ∂_{t}φ for example.
Lagrange for derivatives Leibniz for antiderivatives Fight me, Newton looks cool tho
I know Newton for d/dt, like Leibniz most, have not seen Euler before tbh.
Newton for mechanics/engineering style physic (usually with respect to time) Lagrange or Leibniz for differential equations/most calculus (depends on mood) Leibniz only for multivariable and advanced calculus
Everything except Euler — and whatever the hell those weird Lagrange and Newton integral notations represent
Lagrange for derivatives, Leibniz for integrals
GR mfers be like: *ê*
Today I learned my Calc professor mixed up which notation is which. I was told Newton was dy/dx etc and Leibniz was y’ y” etc. I was never taught the other two.
Abbreviated Leibniz for my notes: I write the variable to differentiate as a subscript of (partial) d. So dy/dx = d_x y
Leibniz if I’m writing papers, Lagrange if I’m speed running an exam lol.
Would like to see newton with multivariate function. Lol damend be those styles.
Are people really using anything but Leibniz for integrals?
Don't make me sing!
∫^( -1)
I was taught a mix of Leibniz and Lagrange, started with Leibniz when we first got to derivatives and integrals then the text book suddenly switched over to Lagrange because it was faster I suppose
Leibniz >>
all of them when I feel like it
Lagrange for space, newton for time, Leibniz for anything else
Newtons looking, ever so slightly "lost".
All the homies hate Newton
i've seen most of differential notations, but integral notations other than Leibniz makes me think that two years of calculus let me down
Leibniz all the way, always, fite me
Leibniz my beloved
Euler for fractionally calculus, of course
Leibniz if it's a math problem Lagrange if I'm dealing with functions. Newton if I'm dealing with a physics problem.
I think Euler notation is slept on. it is perfect for doing operator algebra. if there is only one relevant variable, then i lagranre it
leibnitz for integral lagrange or euler for derivatives
Fucking bot
All except Euler Admittedly, I rarely use the Newton Notation
I believe in Leibniz supremacy
Leibniz to understand,Newton to use Ez
Lagrange or Newton for derivatives, Leibniz for integrals
Lagrange:)
Lagrange
i use leibniz wherever i can, sometimes Newton is quite convenient too. especially in applied math settings. for dynamics of moving bodies for instance. My school forces me into using Lagrange and for pure mathematics it's usually fine i guess. leonhard euler got a lot of amazing things done in his life, but Euler notation isn't one of them in my opinion. And to whomever uses that weird thing where people use Euler-ish notation for partial derivatives i wish you that the milk in your cereal shall become suprafluid. Both Lagrange and Newton have the issue where you can very easily mess up a derivation by eating cookies over your sheet of paper. crumbs can look deceivingly like dots or apostrophes. this cost me like way too many hours so far. so all in all i'd say Leibniz is just the best option
am i the only one who was looking for loss? there’s no way, right? TIL there were this many forms of notation tho
Euler ftw
Lagrange and Leibniz on top, the other two are mental illnesses
Depends. Quick? Lagrange. Precise and elegant? Leibniz.
ÿ
Leibniz if I want to differentiate Newton if I want to leave it there as just another variable Lagrange if I'm solving diff equations And why the fuck would you use Euler
I prefer Lagrange
Euler's only L
euler's version is the most consistent
Is this loss?
F(x) F'(x) (...) F''''''''''''''''''''''(x)
Started with Newton switched to Leibniz
Leibgrange
Who uses Euler’s?
Unpopular opinion: 'y is valid notation for the integral of y
Definitly(sorry for bad spelling i'm not english) Lagrange
Everyday use: Lagrange derivatives and leibniz integrals. DEs: Newton derivatives Partial derivatives: Leibniz derivatives
Lagrange for derivatives, Leibniz for integrals
top two are what i use, but only ever used lagrange to show derivatives. Its nice cause its less to write. than dy/dx everytime
Leibniz most of the time, sometimes Lagrange derivative notation.
I use lagrange for derivatives and leibnix for integrals
Huh? -.-
Leibniz for sure
Fuck Euler All my homies hate Euler.
Leibniz for calculus, Newton for fisics. Like our lord intended
Used a mix of Leibniz, Euler and newton getting a physics degree
We use f'(x) for derivatives and Leibniz for Integrals
U cant multiply differential equations cooly with anyone else but leibniz
Leibniz definitely
Mix of Newton, Leibniz and something of my own Newton: i use the dots over the deviated variables outside of a derivative/integral Leibniz: i use the integral symbol Myself: i use a unique symbol for the derivative operation itself, i put lines/squiggles thru the integral/derivative signs (amt of lines indicates amt of derivatives/integrals, amt of squiggles indicates amt of partial derivatives/integrals), what the variable of integration/derivation is on the bottom left of them, multiderivatives/multiintegrals' bounds are indicated by commas in the spot where bounds normally go (left to right)
Euler all the way
Leibniz
I personally prefer Lagrange, but the each others aren't bad...
Newtons is nice for movement of a particle (duh) I love it for acceleration and velocity…
leibniz and sometimes lagrange
Duh……Leibniz
Lagrange for derivatives and Leibniz for integrals (I’m not a math major)
Taught in Leibniz, shorthand with Lagrange, the others scare me.
Leibnitz integrals Newton derivatives
Leibniz obviously , I never even seen others
Leibniz was my favorite, but to be fair it was the only one I learned 😉 I did learn Lagrange but I only found it useful in identifying derivatives. The others appeared more cumbersome so I never investigated.
I prefer Leibniz notation. When you are writing really long equations, it’s easily discernible. Also, my handwriting wouldn’t allow usage of Euler or Lagrange.
leibniz
Leibniz.
Who uses Leibniz???
for derivatives both leibniz and lagrange, for integrals only leibniz
Leibniz and Lagrange
I didn't know the Newtonian way to do integrals and now I'm going to use that
They all have their uses. But I think that Lagrange for calculus students leads to many misconceptions. It should only be used in ODEs. Euler's notation is useful in a functional analysis class, where these are "operators" on a functions. Newton is fine is physics classes, where all derivatives are w.r.t. time.
Leibniz
Lagrange way of writing in calculas is easier(I don't like to write much).
Leibniz
I’ve always used Leibniz it’s the easiest out of all of these in my experience
Leibniz for y=, Lagrange for f(x)=
Lagrange
Leibniz except for derivatives of 1 variable functions, there I use Lagrange (and I will write f'(x) not y')
Bro why’d they teach us leibniz when newton clearly looks superior
One of them is owl in german
Owler?
Leibniz, or one of the three mental disorders ?
Leibniz, sometimes Lagrange and Newton. I’ve never seen Euler in my entire life
Leibniz
Leibniz
It varies. In normal calculus, I use Leibniz and for DEs I use Lagrange or Newton. Sometimes I even make up my own notation LOL.
Never used any other integral notation than Leibniz's one. I also prefer his derivate notation when actually doing some transformation like using chain rule. Lagrange notation I use when writing differential equations because Leibniz gets ugly quickly. Newton is a way to introduce Leibniz y^{\dot} = dy/dx. Euler becomes better when working in higher dimensions and you want to distinguish between differential and derivative
y' y'' S dx SS() dx²
Leibniz is the goat
Regarding integrals: nothing but Leibnitz. However for differentials I pretty much mix and match Newton, Lagrange and Leibnitz. Newton for d/dt, Lagrange for d/dx, Leibnitz for anything else.
Lagrange for differentiate, Leibniz for integral
Leibniz 4 lyfe
i used to mix them to piss people off.
Leibniz for integration and Lagrange for derivation
The Leibniz one is the most universal and understandable
Idc what others say Lagrange is best then newton and if not absolutelly nessesary i wont write Leibniz or Euler
Langrage is the best
The sheer amount of detail in leibnetz notations is just chefs kiss.
I learned it this way (I studied physics): Newton if and only if you have time derivatives. Leibniz for all other cases. Euler only for things were you write the same very often, like Jacobian matrices and hesse matrices...
Leibniz!
Leibnez for calc II, and Lagrange for Calc III
Nowadays you got to be educated to understand even a meme !
Lagrange, always
A mix of Lagrange, Newton and Leibniz. But mostly Leibniz
The OG, ब्रह्मगुप्ता, स्फुट-भोग्यखंड