Exercises — Power rule — proof for integer, rational exponents
The one rule under test everywhere below:
The two engines behind it (from the parent note): the Limit definition of the derivative and, for whole-number powers, the Binomial theorem.
Level 1 — Recognition
You just apply "drop and drop": slide to the front, then subtract one from the exponent.
Q1. Differentiate .
Q2. Differentiate .
Q3. Differentiate (that is, ).
Recall Solution — Q1, Q2, Q3
Q1. Here . WHAT: apply . WHY: is a variable base with a constant exponent — exactly the shape the power rule handles.
Q2. Here (a negative integer — Stage 3 of the proof covers this). WHY the extra minus: subtracting one from a negative exponent makes it more negative.
Q3. Rewrite the root as a power first: , so . WHY rewrite: the power rule needs an exponent, not a root symbol — same number, cleaner form.
Level 2 — Application
Now the exponents are messier, and you combine the power rule with the fact that constants multiply through and sums differentiate term-by-term.
Q4. Differentiate .
Q5. Differentiate . (Hint: split the fraction first.)
Q6. Find the slope of at .
Recall Solution — Q4, Q5, Q6
Q4. WHAT: rewrite each piece as a clean power. and . Now differentiate term by term (a constant multiple just rides along): WHY the middle term turned positive: — two minus signs.
Q5. WHAT: split before differentiating (you cannot power-rule a quotient directly here). WHY split: dividing powers of the same base subtracts exponents — turning one messy fraction into two simple powers. Now differentiate:
Q6. WHAT: differentiate, then plug in. : At : , so WHY : the exponent means "cube the square root" — take , then cube.
Level 3 — Analysis
Here you reason about the rule, not just crank it — reversing it, using it geometrically, and reading off where a derivative behaves strangely.
Q7. A curve has slope everywhere and passes through the origin's height rule -type family. Which power function has derivative exactly ? (Find and the leading coefficient if .)
Q8. Find the equation of the tangent line to at the point where .
Q9. For , explain — using the derivative — why the graph has a vertical tangent at . (See the step figure.)
Recall Solution — Q7, Q8, Q9
Q7. WHAT: run the power rule backward. If then . We need this to equal . WHY match pieces: two power functions are equal only if their exponents match AND their coefficients match.
- Exponent: .
- Coefficient: .
So (check: ✓).
Q8. WHAT: get the slope, get the point, assemble the line .
- Point: . So .
- Slope: , so . WHY point-slope: it is the fastest way to build a line from one point and one slope.
Q9. WHAT: compute and watch it as . WHY it blows up: is a positive number that shrinks to as , so grows without bound: . An infinite slope means the tangent line stands straight up — vertical. Both sides ( and ) give , so the slope rockets to from both sides. See the near-vertical tangent in the figure below.

Level 4 — Synthesis
Now you rebuild the rule itself — proving special cases from the Limit definition of the derivative and stitching in the Chain rule / Implicit differentiation.
Q10. Prove from the limit definition (Stage-1 style) that , showing every cancellation.
Q11. Prove from first principles that using the common-denominator trick (Stage 3).
Q12. Use implicit differentiation (Stage 4) to prove .
Recall Solution — Q10, Q11, Q12
Q10. WHAT: write the limit-definition quotient and expand by the Binomial theorem. Expand: . Subtract (the leading term cancels): WHY divide by : every surviving term carries at least one , so dividing is legal and exposes which term has no left: Send : the last two terms each contain and vanish.
Q11. WHAT: . Form the difference quotient and combine over a common denominator.
= \lim_{h\to0}\frac{1}{h}\cdot\frac{x - (x+h)}{(x+h)x}.$$ WHY common denominator: it collapses two fractions into one whose top simplifies. The top is $x-(x+h) = -h$: $$= \lim_{h\to0}\frac{-h}{h\,(x+h)x} = \lim_{h\to0}\frac{-1}{(x+h)x}.$$ WHY the $h$ cancels: it was the only thing preventing us from setting $h=0$. Now let $h\to0$: $$f'(x) = \frac{-1}{x\cdot x} = -\frac{1}{x^2} = -x^{-2}. \checkmark$$ **Q12.** WHAT: set $y = x^{2/3}$ and cube both sides to clear the fraction (here $p=2,\,q=3$): $$y^3 = x^2.$$ WHY cube: it turns a fractional exponent into two *integer* powers we already proved. Differentiate both sides with respect to $x$; the left needs the [[Chain rule]] because $y$ depends on $x$: $$3y^2\,\frac{dy}{dx} = 2x.$$ Solve for $\frac{dy}{dx}$: $$\frac{dy}{dx} = \frac{2x}{3y^2}.$$ Substitute $y = x^{2/3}$, so $y^2 = x^{4/3}$: $$\frac{dy}{dx} = \frac{2x}{3\,x^{4/3}} = \tfrac23\,x^{1 - 4/3} = \tfrac23\,x^{-1/3}. \checkmark$$Level 5 — Mastery
Boundary cases, wrong-rule detection, and a limit-of-the-rule sanity check — where deep understanding separates from mechanical use.
Q13. Two look-alikes: differentiate (a) and (b) . Which one uses the power rule, which does not, and why? Give both derivatives.
Q14. Zero/degenerate case. Consider (defined for ). Compute two ways: (i) directly, and (ii) by the power-rule formula with . Confirm they agree, and explain what the formula's factor of is "protecting" us from.
Recall Solution — Q13, Q14
Q13. The deciding question: is the exponent constant with a variable base, or is the base constant with a variable exponent?
- (a) . The base varies; the exponent is just a constant number. This is the power rule — nothing special about the number sitting up top:
- (b) . The base is constant; the exponent varies. This is an exponential, not a power. Its rule (see Derivative of exponential functions) is , and since : WHY they differ: the power rule was proven by expanding in ; that machinery cannot touch a variable exponent. Different structure ⇒ different tool.
Q14. (i) Directly. For , , a constant. The derivative of any constant is (from the limit definition, for all ): (ii) By the formula. gives They agree. WHAT the factor of protects: even though is undefined at , the leading factor multiplies it to before that ever matters. The formula quietly encodes "a constant has zero slope" — the front factor is exactly what kills the otherwise awkward . WHY this is the promised consistency: Stage 2 of the proof and the general formula give the same answer, so the four stages knit together seamlessly.
Recall Self-test scoreboard
Nailed L1–L2 unaided ::: You can apply the rule reliably. Nailed L3 unaided ::: You can reason about slopes and tangents, including vertical ones. Nailed L4 unaided ::: You can rebuild the rule from the limit definition and implicitly. Nailed L5 unaided ::: You spot the power-vs-exponential trap and handle degenerate cases — mastery.
Connections
- Power rule — proof for integer, rational exponents — the parent theorem these drill.
- Limit definition of the derivative — used in Q10, Q11, Q14(i).
- Binomial theorem — expands in Q10.
- Chain rule — attaches in Q12.
- Implicit differentiation — the method of Q12.
- Quotient rule — the tempting-but-wrong path warned against in Q5.
- Derivative of exponential functions — the correct rule for Q13(b).