And we have successfully proven the integration by parts formula!

Click For Summary
SUMMARY

The integration by parts formula has been successfully proven for the case where f(0)=g(0)=0. The formula states that \int _0 ^a f(x) g^{\prime \prime} (x) \: dx = f(a) g^{\prime} (a) - f^{\prime} (a) g (a) + \int _0 ^a f^{\prime \prime} (x) g (x) \: dx. The discussion emphasizes the necessity of performing integration by parts twice, with careful attention to the signs of the terms involved. Participants recommend starting with indefinite integrals to simplify the process.

PREREQUISITES
  • Understanding of integration by parts
  • Familiarity with derivatives and second derivatives
  • Knowledge of definite integrals
  • Basic calculus concepts
NEXT STEPS
  • Practice integration by parts with various functions
  • Explore the properties of definite integrals
  • Study the relationship between derivatives and integrals
  • Learn advanced techniques in calculus, such as the Leibniz rule for differentiation under the integral sign
USEFUL FOR

Students and educators in calculus, mathematicians interested in integration techniques, and anyone seeking to deepen their understanding of the integration by parts formula.

DivGradCurl
Messages
364
Reaction score
0
If [tex]f(0)=g(0)=0[/tex], show that

[tex]\int _0 ^a f(x) g ^{\prime \prime} (x) \: dx = f(a) g^{\prime} (a) - f^{\prime} (a) g (a) + \int _0 ^a f ^{\prime \prime} (x) g (x) \: dx[/tex]

I know I need to use integration by parts, but I'm having a hard time figuring out the right choice of [tex]u[/tex] and [tex]dv[/tex]. What I do know is the following:

[tex]\underbrace{\int _0 ^a f(x) g ^{\prime \prime} (x) \: dx}_{\int _0 ^a u \: dv} = \underbrace{f(a) g^{\prime} (a) - f^{\prime} (a) g (a)}_{\left. uv \right] _0 ^a} + \underbrace{\int _0 ^a f ^{\prime \prime} (x) g (x) \: dx}_{-\int _0 ^a v \: du}[/tex]

Also, the closest I get to [tex]\left. uv \right] _0 ^a[/tex] so far is

[tex]\frac{d}{dx} \left[ f(x) g(x) \right] = f(x) g^{\prime} (x) + f^{\prime} (x) g (x) \Longrightarrow \left. \frac{d}{dx} \left[ f(x) g(x) \right] \right|_0 ^a = f(a) g^{\prime} (a) + f^{\prime} (a) g (a)[/tex]

but, as you can see, that doesn't work because of a sign.

Any help is highly appreciated.
 
Physics news on Phys.org
thiago j,

Since you have g'' and f on the right, and g and f'' on the left, you have to integrate by parts twice. The first time your integrand you end up with on the right will be f'g'. Then integrate again and it will become f''g. Meanwhile you will have created two of the uv terms in front. If you're careful with the signs they'll work out just like the answer that's given.

One more hint. Do it with indefinite interals first to reduce the amount of stuff you have to keep track of at a time.
 
Thank you for the tips!

[tex]\int _0 ^a f(x) g^{\prime \prime} (x) \: dx[/tex]

Integrating by parts gives

[tex]u = f(x) \Rightarrow \frac{du}{dx} = f ^{\prime} (x) \Rightarrow du = f ^{\prime} (x) \: dx[/tex]
[tex]dv = g^{\prime \prime} (x) \: dx \Rightarrow v = g^{\prime} (x)[/tex]


[tex]\int _0 ^a f(x) g^{\prime \prime} (x) \: dx = \left. f(x) g^{\prime} (x) \right] _0 ^a - \int _0 ^a f^{\prime} (x) g^{\prime} (x) \: dx[/tex]
[tex]\int _0 ^a f(x) g^{\prime \prime} (x) \: dx = f(a) g^{\prime} (a) - \int _0 ^a f^{\prime} (x) g^{\prime} (x) \: dx[/tex]

which implies we need to find

[tex]\int _0 ^a f^{\prime} (x) g^{\prime} (x) \: dx[/tex]

Integrating by parts gives

[tex]w = f ^{\prime} (x) \Rightarrow \frac{dw}{dx} = f ^{\prime \prime} (x) \Rightarrow dw = f ^{\prime \prime} (x) \: dx[/tex]
[tex]dk= g^{\prime} (x) \: dx \Rightarrow k = g(x)[/tex]


[tex]\int _0 ^a f^{\prime} (x) g^{\prime} (x) \: dx = \left. f^{\prime} (x) g (x) \right] _0 ^a - \int _0 ^a f^{\prime \prime} (x) g(x) \: dx[/tex]
[tex]\int _0 ^a f^{\prime} (x) g^{\prime} (x) \: dx = f^{\prime} (a) g (a) - \int _0 ^a f^{\prime \prime} (x) g(x) \: dx[/tex]

Thus, we obtain

[tex]\int _0 ^a f(x) g^{\prime \prime} (x) \: dx & = f(a) g^{\prime} (a) - f^{\prime} (a) g (a) + \int _0 ^a f^{\prime \prime} (x) g(x) \: dx[/tex]
 

Similar threads

  • · Replies 17 ·
Replies
17
Views
3K
Replies
3
Views
3K
Replies
64
Views
7K
  • · Replies 3 ·
Replies
3
Views
2K
Replies
6
Views
3K
  • · Replies 2 ·
Replies
2
Views
1K
  • · Replies 3 ·
Replies
3
Views
3K
Replies
6
Views
2K
Replies
10
Views
2K