Of course, there is always more to say about hyperbolic trigonometry…. Next, we’ll look at what is usually called the *logistic curve,* which is the solution to the differential equation

The logistic curve comes up in the usual chapter on differential equations, and is an example of population growth. Without going into too many details (since the emphasis is on hyperbolic trigonometry), is a constant which influences how fast the population grows, and is called the *carrying capacity* of the environment.

Note that when is very small, and so the population growth is almost exponential. But when gets very close to then and so population growth slows down. And of course when growth stops — hence calling the carrying capacity of the environment. It represents the largest population the environment can sustain.

Here is an example of such a curve where and

Notice the S shape, obtained from a curve rapidly growing when the population is small. It happens that the population grows fastest at half the carrying capacity, and then growth slows to zero as the carrying capacity is reached.

Skipping the details (simple separation of variables), the solution to this differential equation is given by

I will digress for a moment, however, to mention partial fractions (as I step on my calculus soapbox). I have mentioned elsewhere that incomprehensible chapter in calculus textbooks: *Techniques of Integration.* Pedagogically a disaster for *so* many reasons.

The first time I address partial fractions is when summing telescoping series, such as

It really is necessary. But I only go so far as to be able to sum such series. (Note: I do series as the middle third of Calculus II, rather than the end. A colleague suggested that students are more tired near the end of the course, which is better for a more technique-oriented discussion of the solution to differential equations, which typically comes before series.)

You also need partial fractions to solve the differential equation for the logistic curve, which is when I revisit the topic. After finding the logistic curve, we talk about partial fractions in more detail. The point is that students see some motivation for the method of partial fractions — which they decidedly *don’t* in a chapter on techniques of integration.

OK, time to step off the soapbox and talk about hyperbolic trigonometry…. The punch line is that the logistic curve is actually a scaled and shifted hyperbolic tangent curve! Of course it *looks* like a hyperbolic tangent, but let’s take a moment to see why.

We first use the definitions of and to write

This results in

You can see the form of the equation of the logistic curve starting to take shape. Since the hyperbolic tangent has horizontal tangents at and we need to scale by a factor of so that the asymptotes of the logistic curve are units apart:

Note that this puts the horizontal asymptotes of the function at and

To take into account the initial population, we need a horizontal shift, since otherwise the initial population would be We can accomplish this be replacing with

We’re almost done at this point: we simply need

Solving and substituting back results in

which, since is an odd function, becomes

And there it is! The logistic curve as a scaled, shifted hyperbolic tangent.

Now what does showing this accomplish? I can’t give you a definite answer from the point of view of the students. But for me, it is a way to tie two seemingly unrelated concepts — hyperbolic trigonometry and solution of differential equations by separation of variables — together in a way that is not entirely contrived (as so many calculus textbook problems are).

I would love to perform the following experiment: work out the solution to the differential equation together as a guided discussion, and then prompt students to suggest functions this curve “looks like.” Of course the might be suggested, but how would we relate this to the exponential function?

Eventually we’d tease out the hyperbolic tangent, since this function actually *does* involve the exponential function. Then I’d move into an inquiry-based lesson: give the students the equation of a logistic curve, and have *them* work out the conversion to the hyperbolic tangent.

And as is typical in such an approach, I would put students into groups, and go around the classroom and nudge them along. See what happens.

I say that yes, calculus students should be able to do this. I recently sent an email about pedagogy in calculus which, among other things, addressed the question: What do calculus students *really* need to know?

There is no room to adequately address that important question here, but in today’s context, I would say this: I think it is more important for a student to be able to rewrite as a hyperbolic tangent than it is for them to know how to sketch the graph of

Why? Because it is *trivial* to graph functions, now. Type the formula into Desmos. But how to interpret the graph? Rewrite it? Analyze it? Draw conclusions from it? We need to focus on what is no longer necessary, and what is now indispensable. To my knowledge, *no one* has successfully done this.

I think it is about time for that to change….

Vince – food for thought. When I teach methods of integration, I try to emphasize techniques the students will see again in Calc III and Diff Eq. So, I emphasize integration by parts (particularly the tabular approach) and partial fractions (cover up method in particular). But I tell students if I wouldn’t do the problem by hand, they shouldn’t either. They will probably never do a trig substitution or integrate cos^6 (x) after they leave my class. I actually have students use WolframAlpha to do the more difficult partial fractions in both Calc II and Diff Eq (for Laplace Transforms) because I think it’s ridiculous to pretend these technologies don’t exist.

Your rewriting the logistic function in terms of tanh is interesting, but I wonder if it doesn’t seem to students as algebraic noodling. And isn’t the shape of the curve, as related to what happens to the population what really matters?

LikeLike

William – fair point. But I have in mind this issue: a student says, “Well, I checked my answer with Wolfram Alpha, but I didn’t get the same answer.” And, from my experience, sometimes the student is correct, but their answer is in a different form from that provided by the technology.

Of course they can try to graph both forms of the answers and see if they are the same, but does not prove they are the same.

In general, how should a student handle the situation when their answer is different from that provided by Alpha, or for that matter, from the solutions manual/back of the book answers? I think this is the critical question.

So, I’m not sure it’s just “noodling.” I think it’s more a matter of being able to use technology intelligently .

And as you mention Alpha, it’s especially critical, since Alpha often provides complex parts of solutions. I find students have a difficult time with this – they are not sure when it is relevant.

I don’t claim to have the answer. But when a student is attempting a homework problem, how would they know if you would do it by hand or not? I claim that a typical undergraduate would not know how to discern this.

So a question for you – how do you guide students regarding whether they should use Alpha (or some equivalent), or whether they should perform the calculation by hand? I do not think this is an easy question to answer….

LikeLike

I wrote you a long reply and then it got lost. Let me see if I can recreate it.

I am very directive – do these problems by hand, use WolfAl for these problems. But, I am teaching a different audience from you – I’m at a state college; if they are in my class, they are engineering majors. So, I might do a bit more handholding than you are comfortable with.

I kind of like the complex part of the solution thing in WA. I think it shows students there is more math ahead in Complex Analysis; they have to be smart enough to ignore it when it doesn’t apply. Something else I do in Calc II is put an elliptic integral into WA, which it of course recognizes, and they get an answer like F(theta, phi). This makes the point that even if WA gives you the answer, you might not know enough Math at this point to successfully interpret it. (WA also occasionally uses the DiLogarithm function in an answer, which I don’t know much about myself – but it makes the same point.)

I worry about instructors who teach this course the same way they did 30 years ago. If I am going to err, I would rather err on the side of using technology.

I really enjoy your blog Vince – based on the topics you choose to talk about, I suspect our teaching styles are similar.

LikeLike