Struggling with the FTOC: Derivative of g(x)

  • Thread starter Thread starter Echo 6 Sierra
  • Start date Start date
  • Tags Tags
    Derivative
Click For Summary

Homework Help Overview

The discussion revolves around applying the Fundamental Theorem of Calculus (FTOC) to find the derivative of the function g(x) defined as the integral of tan²(2t) from 0 to x. Participants are exploring the correct application of the theorem and the implications of differentiating an integral function.

Discussion Character

  • Exploratory, Conceptual clarification, Mathematical reasoning, Problem interpretation

Approaches and Questions Raised

  • Participants discuss the use of the FTOC, considering different interpretations of the theorem and how to apply it to the integral. There are questions about the choice of substitution and the implications of using the product rule in differentiation.

Discussion Status

The discussion is active, with participants providing hints and guidance on the application of the FTOC and differentiation techniques. Some participants express uncertainty about their approaches, while others clarify the relationship between the integral and its derivative.

Contextual Notes

There are indications of confusion regarding the application of the product rule and the choice of substitution for the integral. Participants are navigating through the complexities of the problem without reaching a consensus on the best approach.

Echo 6 Sierra
Messages
31
Reaction score
2
Using the FTOC and attemting to find the derivative of [tex]g(x) \int^x_0 tan^2 2tdt[/tex] I made [tex]u=tan^2[/tex]. I know it will wind up being F(x)-F(0) but I'm at a loss with what to do with the 2t. Am I on the right track or have I chosen the wrong u?

If you could, please guide me and don't spell out the answer.
 
Physics news on Phys.org
I think the problem is that there are 2 fundamental theorems of calculus. One of them is that:
[tex]\int_{a}^{b}f(x)dx=F(b)-F(a)[/tex]
where F(x) is an antiderivative of f(x). The other is that
[tex]\frac{d}{dx}\int_{0}^{x} f(t)dt=f(x)[/tex]
I think they mean for you to use the latter along with the product rule for differentiation.
 
Of course, you use the product rule also because of that g(x)
but the derivative of [tex]\int_0^x f(t)dt[/tex] is just f(x).
 
I've gotten another hint that (tan^2 2t) should have been my u. With that I get (tan2x*tan2x) which I made (sin2x/cos2x)(sin2x/cos2x). Now I make with d/dx g(x)=d/dx[g(u)subx - g(u)sub0] the sub0 drops off because its zero and now I have d/dx[g(u)subx]=f(x) which leaves me with (sin2x/cos2x)(sin2x/cos2x).

Sorry, got lazy with the la tex.
 
Why in the world would you change from tan(2x) to [itex]\frac{sin(2x)}{cos(2x)}[/itex]? That just makes it more complicated!

Representing, for the moment, [itex]\int^x_0 tan^2 2tdt[/itex] as "f(x)", the problem is to differentiate g(x)f(x) and its derivative is, of course, g'(x)f(x)+ g(x)f'(x) (the product rule).


By the Fundamental Theorem of Calculus (one of them, anyway),
f'(x)= tan2(2x)- it's as easy as that.

So your derivative is
[tex]g'(x)\int^x_0 tan^2 2tdt+ g(x)tan^2(2x)[/tex]
 
...good grief...I have a long way to go. Thank you.
 

Similar threads

  • · Replies 12 ·
Replies
12
Views
1K
  • · Replies 11 ·
Replies
11
Views
2K
Replies
5
Views
1K
  • · Replies 21 ·
Replies
21
Views
1K
Replies
1
Views
2K
  • · Replies 7 ·
Replies
7
Views
2K
Replies
8
Views
2K
  • · Replies 6 ·
Replies
6
Views
5K
Replies
2
Views
2K
  • · Replies 4 ·
Replies
4
Views
2K