Prove \int _a ^b f(x) \: dx with Continuous f

  • Thread starter Thread starter DivGradCurl
  • Start date Start date
  • Tags Tags
    Integration
Click For Summary

Homework Help Overview

The discussion revolves around proving a specific integral relationship involving a continuous one-to-one function and its inverse. The problem is divided into two parts: the first part requires proving the integral equality, while the second part asks for a geometric interpretation of the result.

Discussion Character

  • Exploratory, Conceptual clarification, Problem interpretation

Approaches and Questions Raised

  • The original poster attempts to prove the integral relationship using integration by parts and substitution, but expresses uncertainty about the geometric interpretation required in part (b). Some participants suggest drawing diagrams to visualize the relationship between the areas represented by the integrals.

Discussion Status

Participants are actively engaging with the problem, with some providing guidance on how to approach the geometric interpretation. There is a mix of understanding and confusion, with some expressing appreciation for the insights shared by others.

Contextual Notes

One participant notes that the function discussed may not be one-to-one in all quadrants, which raises questions about the applicability of the integral relationship under certain conditions.

DivGradCurl
Messages
364
Reaction score
0
Problem:

(a) If [tex]f[/tex] is one-to-one and [tex]f^{\prime}[/tex] is continuous, prove that

[tex]\int _a ^b f(x) \: dx = bf(b) - af(a) - \int _{f(a)} ^{f(b)} f ^{-1} (y) \: dy[/tex]

(b) In the case where [tex]f[/tex] is a positive function and [tex]b > a > 0[/tex], draw a diagram to give a geometric interpretation of part (a).

My work:

(a) [tex]\int _a ^b f(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 = dx \Rightarrow v = x[/tex]

[tex]\int _a ^b f(x) \: dx = \left. xf(x) \right] _a ^b - \int _a ^b x f ^{\prime} (x) \: dx[/tex]
[tex]\int _a ^b f(x) \: dx = bf(b) - af(a) - \int _a ^b x f ^{\prime} (x) \: dx[/tex]

Applying the Substitution Rule gives

[tex]y = f(x) \Leftrightarrow x = f^{-1} (y) \Rightarrow \frac{dy}{dx} = f ^{\prime} (x) \Rightarrow dx = \frac{dy}{f ^{\prime} (x)}[/tex]

[tex]y(b) = f(b)[/tex]
[tex]y(a) = f(a)[/tex]

[tex]\int _a ^b f(x) \: dx = bf(b) - af(a) - \int _{f(a)} ^{f(b)} f ^{-1} (y) \: dy[/tex]

(b) I'm not sure how I should handle this one. The left-hand side is quite easy to visualize: it corresponds to a generic integral from a to b. The right-hand side does not seem to be that simple, and I need some help.

Any help is highly appreciated.
 
Physics news on Phys.org
1) Draw orthogonal x-and y-axes on a piece of paper
2) Mark the interval [a,b] on the x-axis, and draw f(x) over it, so that it ranges between f(a) and f(b); mark f(a) and f(b) on the y-axis.
3) What rectangle can you naturally construct whose area is a*f(a)?
4) What rectangle can you naturally construct whose area is b*f(b)?
5) Look and behold, and see if you find an easy geometric interpretation of the equality..
 
Last edited:
You know Thiago, I don't claim to know much math, no more than 1% in fact, so I'm not surprised your relation is news for me and I'm sure you will follow Arildno so I don't think I'm giving anything away by posting the attached plot for the function [itex]y(x)=0.2 x^2[/itex] from 2 to 4.
 

Attachments

  • plot1.JPG
    plot1.JPG
    4.4 KB · Views: 447
Last edited:
I met this relation in my first analysis course, and it was, to me, one of those "Wow, math is really cool!"-experiences..
 
Thank you guys! I can now see what you're talking about. It's pretty straight-forward. I was a bit confused by a "big fat" generic equation. :)
 
saltydog said:
You know Thiago, I don't claim to know much math, no more than 1% in fact, so I'm not surprised your relation is news for me and I'm sure you will follow Arildno so I don't think I'm giving anything away by posting the attached plot for the function [itex]y(x)=0.2 x^2[/itex] from 2 to 4.

Just want to correct my statement above: The function [itex]y(x)=0.2x^2[/itex] is NOT one-to-one and only because it's so in the first quadrant would it qualify for the relation above with a and b in the same quadrant.
 

Similar threads

  • · Replies 3 ·
Replies
3
Views
1K
  • · Replies 25 ·
Replies
25
Views
2K
  • · Replies 2 ·
Replies
2
Views
1K
Replies
14
Views
3K
  • · Replies 7 ·
Replies
7
Views
2K
  • · Replies 6 ·
Replies
6
Views
3K
  • · Replies 6 ·
Replies
6
Views
5K
  • · Replies 7 ·
Replies
7
Views
1K
  • · Replies 11 ·
Replies
11
Views
3K