Does the Leibniz Integral Rule Apply to Time-Dependent Integrals?

  • Context: Graduate 
  • Thread starter Thread starter mcah5
  • Start date Start date
  • Tags Tags
    Theorem
Click For Summary

Discussion Overview

The discussion centers on the application of the Leibniz Integral Rule to time-dependent integrals, specifically examining conditions under which the rule holds true and the implications of variable limits of integration.

Discussion Character

  • Technical explanation, Conceptual clarification, Debate/contested

Main Points Raised

  • One participant presents the Leibniz Integral Rule and seeks confirmation of its validity, noting a lack of reference in their textbook.
  • Another participant asserts the rule is valid under the condition that both the function and its partial derivative with respect to time are continuous.
  • A third participant references a specific proof found in a textbook and points out a notational correction regarding the use of partial versus functional derivatives.
  • A participant expresses gratitude for the confirmation of the rule's validity, mentioning its use in a physics textbook without justification.
  • One participant questions whether the rule holds when the limits of integration are functions of time, suggesting that the rule may not apply in such cases.
  • Another participant provides the modified form of the Leibniz Integral Rule for variable limits and notes a condition for its validity related to the uniform continuity of the function.

Areas of Agreement / Disagreement

Participants generally agree on the validity of the Leibniz Integral Rule under certain conditions, but there is disagreement regarding the implications when the limits of integration are functions of time, indicating that the discussion remains unresolved on this aspect.

Contextual Notes

Limitations include the need for continuity conditions on the function and its derivatives, as well as the implications of variable limits of integration, which remain under discussion.

mcah5
Messages
38
Reaction score
0
[tex]\frac {d} {dt} \int_{a}^{b} f(x,t) dx = \int_{a}^{b} \frac {\delta} {\delta t} f(x,t) dx[/tex]

From trial and error, it seems true but I can't find it in my textbook anywhere. Am I missing something obvious?
 
Physics news on Phys.org
Yes, this is true provided f and [itex]\frac{\partial f}{\partial t}[/itex] are continuous. This is an example of interchanging limits. Be careful about doing that because in general you can't. This borders on advanced calculus, but my regular calc textbook gives a proof in the appendix. Maybe yours does too.
 
There's a very thorough proof on page 245 of the Bartle if you have access to one of those. Also, note that as a notational thing
[tex] \frac{\delta}{\delta g}[/tex]
usually denotes a functional derivative, while what you want is \partial, not \delta in LaTeX, like
[tex] \frac{\partial}{\partial t}[/tex]
 
Ok, thanks. Just needed to confirm that the statement was true (my physics textbook used it in a proof and never justified the statement, so I wanted to make sure)
 
This is only true though when the bounds (a & b) are held constant, correct? I mean, if they were a=u(x) and b=v(x), the limits couldn't be switched.
 
If the limits themselves are also functions of t, the theorem (called Leibniz integral rule, IIRC) is:

[tex]\frac {d} {dt} \int_{a(t)}^{b(t)} f(x,t) dx = f(b(t),t)\frac{d b}{d t}-f(a(t),t)\frac{d a}{d t}+\int_{a(t)}^{b(t)} \frac {\partial} {\partial t} f(x,t) dx[/tex]

I know a sufficient condition for this to hold is that f be uniformly continuous in the region of interest.
 

Similar threads

  • · Replies 6 ·
Replies
6
Views
3K
  • · Replies 3 ·
Replies
3
Views
1K
  • · Replies 1 ·
Replies
1
Views
4K
  • · Replies 4 ·
Replies
4
Views
2K
  • · Replies 1 ·
Replies
1
Views
3K
  • · Replies 3 ·
Replies
3
Views
4K
  • · Replies 20 ·
Replies
20
Views
5K
  • · Replies 6 ·
Replies
6
Views
4K
  • · Replies 16 ·
Replies
16
Views
5K
  • · Replies 11 ·
Replies
11
Views
3K