Integrate (X/X+d)dX: Solve w/Substitution

  • Context: Undergrad 
  • Thread starter Thread starter funkwort
  • Start date Start date
  • Tags Tags
    Integration
Click For Summary

Discussion Overview

The discussion revolves around the integration of the expression (X/(X+d)) dX, focusing on methods such as substitution, partial fractions, and integration by parts. Participants explore various approaches to solve the integral, including long division and different substitutions, while addressing the implications of their choices.

Discussion Character

  • Exploratory
  • Mathematical reasoning
  • Debate/contested

Main Points Raised

  • One participant expresses difficulty in integrating (X/(X+d)) dX and suggests using partial fractions, noting the same degree of numerator and denominator complicates this approach.
  • Another participant proposes using long division to simplify the expression before integration.
  • A different approach involves integration by parts, with a participant suggesting a substitution of u = x+d, leading to a transformation of the integral.
  • Some participants discuss the validity of different methods and whether they yield the same result, with one participant questioning why two different substitutions produce seemingly different answers.
  • Clarifications are made regarding the constant of integration and how it affects the results of the integration process.
  • Participants explore the implications of definite integrals and how constants may cancel out in the final evaluation.

Areas of Agreement / Disagreement

There is no consensus on the best method for integration, as participants propose multiple approaches and express differing opinions on the outcomes of their calculations. Some participants assert that the results from different methods are equivalent, while others challenge this view.

Contextual Notes

Participants clarify that the integral in question is definite, with limits from 0 to L, which influences the evaluation of the integral and the comparison of results from different methods.

funkwort
Messages
22
Reaction score
0
I cannot figure out how to integrate (X/X+d)dX. I know that I should probably use the method of partial fractions but the num and den degrees are the same and the den cannot be broken down. I guess I could use some sort of substitution but which? please help :confused:
 
Physics news on Phys.org
try using long division to divide x by (x+d) & see what you get.
 
I'd do integration by parts.

You can write this as [tex]x * \frac{1}{x+d} dx[/tex]

The second part should look familiar. (arctan)

The [tex]\int{u*dv} = uv - \int{v*du}[/tex]

Let u = x and dv = [tex]\frac{1}{x+d}[/tex]

Edit: I made a mistake. Sorry. For the arctan rule to apply there needs to be an x^2 in the bottom. Maybe you can still do it that way. I don't know.
 
Last edited by a moderator:
but the num and den degrees are the same

What does that have to do with anything?
 
wait... if I let u = x+d then x = u-d and int (x/x+d)dx becomes
int(1-d/u)du = u - dlnu = x+d - dln(x+d). Is this correct??

Hurkyl said:
What does that have to do with anything?

You're very helpful :approve:
 
Thanks, I try. :smile:

I was trying to hint that partial fractions still applies when the numerator and denominator have the same degree. (At least, the first step of long division does)
 
Very Simple Way, Here It,

(x)/(x+d) = (x+d-d)/(x+d) = (1) - (d/(x+d))

then the answer will be:

x - d*ln(x+d) + C

hehe, isn't that easy?
 
Last edited:
The above is correct, except it is "-" instead of "+".
 
HEHE, right, i fixed it :P
 
  • #10
TheDestroyer said:
Very Simple Way, Here It,

(x)/(x+d) = (x+d-d)/(x+d) = (1) - (d/(x+d))

then the answer will be:

x - d*ln(x+d) + C

hehe, isn't that easy?

Ok, I see, thanks. However, I don't understand why the below procedure doesn't work when it's just another simple substitution??

if I let u = x+d then x = u-d and int (x/x+d)dx becomes int(1-d/u)du = u - dlnu = x+d - dln(x+d).
 
  • #11
I don't understand why the below procedure doesn't work when it's just another simple substitution??

Because you forgot the constant of integration.
 
  • #12
I understand that I forgot the constant of integration, but I am referring to the fact that Destroyer's procedure produces: x - dln(x+d) + C while the other procedure produces (x+d) - dln(x+d) + C. Shouldn't they produce the same value considering they are merely two different substitutions?
 
  • #13
Shouldn't they produce the same value considering they are merely two different substitutions?

The two answers are the same.
 
  • #14
no ... x does not equal x+d

you're not helping me here
 
  • #15
Yes he is...he told you the answers were the same. You should have believed him. x is not x + d. But what is d? d is a constant. So did you really get a different answer from TheDestroyer's (lol at the name)? No, you did not. Both answers are valid *antiderivatives*, because when you differentiate them with respect to x, all constant terms drop out...and you end up back with the integrand. So absorb d into C...they are both constant terms. Your new C = C+d. Happy? :wink:
 
  • #16
Ok wait, I just realized I made a mistake at the beginning of the thread. I should have clarified that this isn't an indefinite integral. The limits are from (0 to L) so:

1) let u = x+d then x = u-d
(x/x+d)dx = (1-d/u)du = u - dlnu = x+d - dln(x+d)

from (0 to L) = (L+d) - dln(1+L/d)

2) (x)/(x+d)dx = (x+d-d)/(x+d)dx = (1) - (d/(x+d))dx = x - dln(x+d)

from (0 to L) = L - dln(1+L/d)

am I still missing it, or are they still the same?

PS. forgive for going on and on :blushing:
 
Last edited:
  • #17
Yes, they are still one and the same. When taking the definite integral, you will subtract one from the other, so:

[tex]g(L) - g(0) = L + d - d * \ln(L+d) - (0+d - d * \ln(0+d))<br /> = L - 0 + d - d - d * \ln(L+d) + d * \ln(0+d) = L - d(\ln(L+d) - \ln(d))<br /> = L - d * \ln(L/d + 1)[/tex]

Notice how the d cancels out the -d (just like the arbitrary constant of integration, C, cancels out) when you take the definite integral.
 
Last edited:
  • #18
holy crap ... lol. I can't believe I didn't see that
thank you
 

Similar threads

  • · Replies 4 ·
Replies
4
Views
4K
  • · Replies 6 ·
Replies
6
Views
3K
  • · Replies 11 ·
Replies
11
Views
3K
  • · Replies 6 ·
Replies
6
Views
4K
  • · Replies 4 ·
Replies
4
Views
3K
  • · Replies 19 ·
Replies
19
Views
5K
  • · Replies 8 ·
Replies
8
Views
4K
  • · Replies 4 ·
Replies
4
Views
4K
  • · Replies 1 ·
Replies
1
Views
2K
  • · Replies 5 ·
Replies
5
Views
3K