Indefinite Integration Problem

Click For Summary

Homework Help Overview

The discussion revolves around an indefinite integration problem encountered in a Calculus I context. The original poster seeks verification of their solution and clarification on their assumptions regarding constants in the integration process.

Discussion Character

  • Exploratory, Assumption checking, Conceptual clarification

Approaches and Questions Raised

  • Participants discuss the idea of replacing constants in integration, with some suggesting combining constants for simplicity. Others question the reasoning behind specific substitutions in the context of the problem.

Discussion Status

Some guidance has been offered regarding the treatment of constants in definite versus indefinite integrals. Multiple interpretations of the integration process and the implications of the substitutions are being explored, with no explicit consensus reached yet.

Contextual Notes

The original poster mentions that they have not yet covered definite integrals, which may impact their understanding of the problem. There are references to specific values and constants that are under discussion, indicating potential gaps in information or assumptions being questioned.

opticaltempest
Messages
135
Reaction score
0
Calc I - Simple Indefinite Integration Problem

Hello,

Here is an indefinite integration problem I have been
working on. Would anyone be willing to check my solution?
Are my assumptions about replacing the C and -C correct?

http://img457.imageshack.us/img457/8933/problem0kw.jpg"

http://img457.imageshack.us/img457/2315/solution9zq.jpg"

Thanks
 
Last edited by a moderator:
Physics news on Phys.org
Set up your integrals as definite integrals and the constants will take care of themselves! :)
 
This is my first section on covering integrals so I haven't covered definite integrals yet.
 
It would make more sense to combine the two constants (and would be much better to use different letters to represent them) into one, then determine its value.
 
I got some more help on this problem today but I am still stuck. It was suggested to
me that after realizing v(0)=v_0 we can come up with

v_0^2 = 2GM(1/R) + C

How can we conclude this?
Why replace the 1/y with 1/R ?Here is the entire solution that was presented to me
--------------------------------------------------

v^2 = 2GM(1/y) + C

then from v(0)=v_0 we would have obtained

[v_0]^2 = 2GM(1/R) + C

C = [v_0]^2 - 2GM(1/R)

so that

v^2 = 2GM(1/y) + [v_0]^2 - 2GM(1/R)

which can be rewritten as

v^2 = [v_0]^2 + 2GM( 1/y - 1/R)
http://img440.imageshack.us/img440/6539/solution14yb.jpg"

http://img440.imageshack.us/img440/5108/solution20jn.jpg"

Thanks
 
Last edited by a moderator:

Similar threads

  • · Replies 4 ·
Replies
4
Views
2K
  • · Replies 4 ·
Replies
4
Views
2K
Replies
2
Views
2K
Replies
11
Views
3K
  • · Replies 11 ·
Replies
11
Views
2K
  • · Replies 7 ·
Replies
7
Views
9K
  • · Replies 7 ·
Replies
7
Views
2K
  • · Replies 12 ·
Replies
12
Views
2K
Replies
10
Views
3K
  • · Replies 7 ·
Replies
7
Views
2K