Originally Posted by jc0390

I'm 99.99% sure that should be AR instead of MR >_>

MR would be d/dq (TR)

wait you mean MR= (Rate of change of TR) right? WTH?! In other words MR= Rate of change of Revenue upon change in quantity right? :S

Edit: Oh nvrmind lol MR is change in revenue created by producing an extra unit of product...and its an decreasing variable *facepalm* I'm apparently an econ major :S

thanks for the info. everyone! I'm thinking Macro will be the one for me
Is there much that you learn in Micro that comes in handy when studying Macro? Just wondering if I'll have trouble grasping some of the concepts if I haven't studied Micro before Macro..

Originally Posted by KMarsden

thanks for the info. everyone! I'm thinking Macro will be the one for me
Is there much that you learn in Micro that comes in handy when studying Macro? Just wondering if I'll have trouble grasping some of the concepts if I haven't studied Micro before Macro..

The first 3-4 weeks of Micro and Macro cover the same material (basic principles of economics like supply and demand, etc.).

You won't be at a disadvantage without Micro, as the courses cover different material after the first month

Awesome, thanks

Originally Posted by jc0390

I'm 99.99% sure that should be AR instead of MR >_>

MR would be d/dq (TR)

Yeah. That would be the joke.

"Still got it. xD"

I thought the 'xD' would be indication enough, but maybe next time I'll throw on some flashing lights or something. xD (WARNING: This has been a joke).

EDIT: Although thinking about it now, depending on how you've defined your variables, it is still well defined to say that when TR is linear (as it is in 1B03), d(TR)/dq = MR = (delta)TR/(delta)q (which uses secant line approximations...but since it's linear, it's actually an equality, and the 'deltas' are just the slope). I was subconsciously telling the truth, lol.

Originally Posted by Mowicz

That would be the joke.

"Still got it. xD"

Although thinking about it now, depending on how you've defined your variables, it is still well defined to say that when TR is linear (as it is in 1B03), d(TR)/dq = MR = (delta)TR/(delta)q (which uses secant lines). I was subconsciously telling the truth, lol.

well lol this maths lingo often gets me all muddled up but I think you are refferring to a perfect competition market situation and a hypothetical situation where the level of productivity is infinite, so much so that making another unit of product is still demanded upto the same level by the consumers and doesn't increase our costs either! Waitt loll I really need to review my econ! I last studied 1B03 material in highschool 3 years ago! Am I wrong/right here :S

Most of that sounds about right...but I'd be out of my league, trying to understand most of that technical jargon since the only econ I've ever taken was 1B03. Haha.

To see what I mean mathematically (which naturally seems to be clearer to me) is that you look at the Total Revenue graphed against Quantity, and it's linear (or 'piece-wise' linear) as opposed to being a smooth curve whose slope changes. This was frequently the case in 1B03...almost exclusively if I recall correctly...we weren't required to compute any derivatives, at least when I was taught the course. Anyway, it's very easy to figure out the 'slope' of a line segment, and this is equal to the derivative of the function at all of the points on this line segment**. (This is special and only because it's a straight line)

So MR equals the derivative which equals the slope of the secant line [(y2 - y1/x2 - x1) a.k.a. "rise over run"] connecting two points. ie.

MR = d(TR)/dq = "rise over run" = (delta)TR / (delta)q


**Of course to be technical, the 'pointy bit' (called a cusp) where two line segments come together does not have a derivative, since its difference quotient is not well defined as it gets arbitrarily close to the cusp (You may have seen this in an early calculus course).