Simple Riemann Sums question with answers not lining up

Click For Summary

Discussion Overview

The discussion revolves around the calculation of the area under the curve y = 3x^2 from x = 1 to x = 4 using both antidifferentiation and Riemann sums. Participants explore the discrepancies between the two methods and clarify the setup of the summation process.

Discussion Character

  • Exploratory
  • Mathematical reasoning
  • Technical explanation

Main Points Raised

  • The original poster calculates the area using antidifferentiation, arriving at 63 square units.
  • The original poster attempts to calculate the area using Riemann sums but arrives at 27 square units, leading to confusion.
  • One participant questions the setup of the summation, pointing out that the limits of integration should correspond to the values of x = 1 and x = 4.
  • Another participant confirms the expression for x as (3k)/n and identifies the need to adjust the formula to correctly reflect the limits of integration.
  • The original poster realizes the mistake in the summation setup and proposes a corrected expression for x as 1 + k * 3/n.
  • After revising the calculation, the original poster finds that the area calculated using Riemann sums matches the antidifferentiation result of 63 square units.

Areas of Agreement / Disagreement

Participants generally agree on the correct method for calculating the area under the curve, but there was initial confusion regarding the setup of the Riemann sums. The discussion reflects a process of clarification and correction rather than a definitive conclusion.

Contextual Notes

The discussion highlights the importance of correctly setting up the limits for Riemann sums and the potential for errors in mathematical reasoning when assumptions are not clearly stated.

singleton
Messages
119
Reaction score
0
Please tell me if I am doing the summation of rectangular areas wrongly.

Using summation of rectangles, find the area enclosed between the curve y = 3x^2 and the x-axis from x = 1 to x = 4.

Now, before I answer the way it asks, I want to use antidifferentiation first to see what I should expect.
A'(x) = F'(x) = 3x^2
Therefore F(x) = x^3

Area = F(4) - F(1)
= 64 - 1
= 63 square units, correct?

Now, using the summation of rectangles I do this:

I start by finding the width of the rectangles: (4-1)/n = 3/n
[tex]\sum_{k=1}^n\ f(x) * (3/n)[/tex]
[tex]= \sum_{k=1}^n\ [3(k * 3/n)^2] * (3/n)[/tex]
[tex]= \sum_{k=1}^n\ [3 * k^2 * 9/n^2] * (3/n)[/tex]
[tex]= 81/n^3\sum_{k=1}^n\ k^2[/tex]
[tex]= 81/n^3 * n(n+1)(2n+1)/6[/tex]
[tex]= 81/6 * n(n+1)(2n+1)/n^3[/tex]
[tex]= 27/2 * (n+1)(2n+1)/n^2[/tex]

Then I do the limit and find 27/2 * (n+1)/n * (2n+1)/n
= 27/2 * (1 + 1/n)(2 + 1/n)
As n approaches infinity, 1/n = 0

27/2 * (1 + 0)(2 + 0)
Thus I end up with 27 square units.

Two very different answers. I'm not sure what I'm doing wrong with the sums, as far as my book is concerned I'm following all "legal" rules. I've read and re-read this a few times and I don't notice any glaring mistake (on my sore eyes).
 
Physics news on Phys.org
You have [tex]= \sum_{k=1}^n\ [3(k * 3/n)^2] * (3/n)[/tex]

so, I take it, x= (3k)/n. what is that when k= 1? Your integral is supposed to start at x= 1 isn't it?

What is x when k= n? Wasn't your integral supposed to end at x= 4?
 
HallsofIvy said:
You have [tex]= \sum_{k=1}^n\ [3(k * 3/n)^2] * (3/n)[/tex]

so, I take it, x= (3k)/n. what is that when k= 1? Your integral is supposed to start at x= 1 isn't it?

yes, x = 3k/n (the iteration of rectangle times the width).

when k = 1, x = 3/n :bugeye:

What is x when k= n? Wasn't your integral supposed to end at x= 4?

When k = n... x = 3 :rolleyes:

Back to the drawing board :-p (sorry for something so stupid!)

And thanks for making me think :biggrin:

I'm thinking it should be x = 1 + k * 3/n
I'll punch it in and see how that works out. It would seem to satisfy both k = 1 and when k = n.
(Off by one...shudder...reminds me of my C programming :biggrin:)
 
Last edited:
Thanks again, HallsofIvy

I gave it a work through and it turned out 63 square units like the other method does.

I would list my results for others to see, only it takes me forever to edit tex by hand :(
 

Similar threads

  • · Replies 2 ·
Replies
2
Views
2K
  • · Replies 3 ·
Replies
3
Views
5K
  • · Replies 2 ·
Replies
2
Views
3K
  • · Replies 16 ·
Replies
16
Views
5K
  • · Replies 5 ·
Replies
5
Views
3K
  • · Replies 2 ·
Replies
2
Views
2K
  • · Replies 7 ·
Replies
7
Views
2K
  • · Replies 6 ·
Replies
6
Views
2K
  • · Replies 3 ·
Replies
3
Views
3K
  • · Replies 4 ·
Replies
4
Views
3K