Integral of Tangent: Alterations and Proofs

  • Context: Graduate 
  • Thread starter Thread starter arcnets
  • Start date Start date
  • Tags Tags
    Integral Tangent
Click For Summary

Discussion Overview

The discussion centers on the integral of the tangent function, specifically addressing the expression for the integral and its validity across the domain where tangent is defined. Participants explore how to modify the integral statement to ensure it is applicable everywhere tangent is defined and seek a formal proof for the revised statement.

Discussion Character

  • Technical explanation
  • Debate/contested
  • Mathematical reasoning

Main Points Raised

  • Carsten states that the integral of tan(x) is -ln(cos(x)), but notes that this is only defined where cos(x) > 0.
  • Some participants propose that the integral can be expressed as -ln(|cos(x)|) to cover all cases where tangent is defined.
  • There is a challenge regarding the correctness of using -ln(|cos(x)|), with concerns that it may produce incorrect results when cos(x) < 0.
  • Participants discuss specific examples, such as integrating tan(x) between -pi/4 and pi/8, to illustrate potential issues with the logarithmic expressions.
  • There is a mention of the general principle that the integral of 1/x is ln(x) for positive x, which raises questions about the necessity of absolute values in other contexts.

Areas of Agreement / Disagreement

Participants express differing views on the correctness of the integral expressions and the implications of using absolute values. The discussion remains unresolved regarding the best way to express the integral of tangent and the validity of the proposed modifications.

Contextual Notes

Some participants highlight that the integral of tan(x) involves considerations of the domain and the behavior of the cosine function, which complicates the use of logarithmic expressions. There are unresolved questions about the implications of using absolute values in various contexts.

arcnets
Messages
493
Reaction score
0
Hi all,
we know that the integral of tan(x) is -ln(cos(x)).

Now:
-ln(cos(x)) is only defined where cos(x) > 0. BUT tan(x) is defined everywhere except where cos(x) = 0.

My questions:
1) How can we alter the 1st statement so that the tangent has an integral everywhere it is defined?
2) Can you give a formal proof for that better statement?

Thx,
Carsten
 
Physics news on Phys.org
Sketch of an answer: the integral is -ln(|cos(x)|). The tangent graph is broken up into pieces at odd multiples of pi. All the pieces look the same, while the cosine graph switches back and forth between positive and negative. If you want to do a definite integral, you can't cross one of the breaks.
 
To emphasise mathman's crucial point:

"we know that the integral of tan(x) is -ln(cos(x))." is incorrect.

The integral of tan(x) is -ln(|cos x|) which is defined for all x except where tan(x) itself is not defined.
 
Originally posted by HallsofIvy
To emphasise mathman's crucial point:

"we know that the integral of tan(x) is -ln(cos(x))." is incorrect.

The integral of tan(x) is -ln(|cos x|) which is defined for all x except where tan(x) itself is not defined.
This is something I've never been able to get me head around. Why do we say it is -ln(|cos x|) would that not in fact produce wrong answers where cos x < 0 ?

I don't know if that is a good example, but there do seem to be other times where defining the answer as ln[|f(x)|] appears to produce incorrect answers and what they really mean is ln[f(x)] where f(x)>0.
 
why does it produce the wrong answer?

Take the integral of tan between -pi/4 and pi/8. Why do you think the answer using logs is wrong?
 
Thanks. OK, I see:
F(x) = -ln(cos x) and F(x) = -ln(-cos x) both satisfy dF/dx = tan x, but only one of them is defined for each x.
 
Originally posted by matt grime
why does it produce the wrong answer?

Take the integral of tan between -pi/4 and pi/8. Why do you think the answer using logs is wrong?
I don't think the answer is wrong, in fact I see why it appears to work in this case. But some times using modulus signs seems to produce incorrect answers when dealing with logs.
 
Post an example and we'll see what's up with it.
 
As matt grime suggested, please post an example in which "using modulus signs seems to produce incorrect answers when dealing with logs." I would like to see it. The only case I can think of would be when one limit of integration is positive and the other negative. That CAN'T have a correct answer!

You don't need to deal with tangent to see why we need the absolute value (modulus). f(x)= 1/x is defined for all x except 0. To say that the integral of 1/x is ln(x) restricting x to be positive would simply ignore half of the function.
 

Similar threads

  • · Replies 5 ·
Replies
5
Views
3K
  • · Replies 8 ·
Replies
8
Views
4K
  • · Replies 14 ·
Replies
14
Views
4K
  • · Replies 6 ·
Replies
6
Views
3K
  • · Replies 29 ·
Replies
29
Views
6K
  • · Replies 3 ·
Replies
3
Views
3K
  • · Replies 11 ·
Replies
11
Views
3K
  • · Replies 1 ·
Replies
1
Views
4K
  • · Replies 4 ·
Replies
4
Views
2K
  • · Replies 3 ·
Replies
3
Views
3K