This looks like an easy integral, why cant i get it

  • Context: Undergrad 
  • Thread starter Thread starter jmf322
  • Start date Start date
  • Tags Tags
    Integral
Click For Summary

Discussion Overview

The discussion revolves around the integral of sin(x)^2 and the integral of sin(x^2). Participants explore various methods and identities for solving these integrals, including trigonometric identities and integration techniques.

Discussion Character

  • Exploratory
  • Mathematical reasoning
  • Debate/contested

Main Points Raised

  • One participant expresses difficulty in simplifying the integral of sin(x)^2 using trigonometric identities and seeks suggestions.
  • Another participant suggests using the identity sin(x)^2 = (1 - cos(2x))/2 to approach the integral.
  • A different interpretation of the integral, sin(x^2), is proposed, which may involve Fresnel integrals.
  • One participant provides a specific solution for the integral of sin^2(x), stating it equals 1/2 x - 1/4 sin(2x) + C.
  • Concerns are raised about providing direct answers in the discussion, emphasizing the importance of not revealing solutions outright.
  • Another participant questions whether the integral refers to sin(x)sin(x) or sin(x^2) and discusses different approaches for each case.
  • Some participants argue that the integral of sin(x^2) cannot be integrated by parts and confirm the need for Fresnel integrals.
  • A detailed methodology for integrating sin^2(x) is presented, showing step-by-step calculations leading to the result.
  • Discussion includes the importance of including the additive constant in indefinite integrals.
  • One participant suggests using integration by parts for sin^2(x) and presents an alternative method that avoids complex identities.
  • Concerns are raised about the complexity of integrating sin(x^2) compared to other functions, with references to the challenges of certain forms of integrals.

Areas of Agreement / Disagreement

Participants express differing views on the best methods for integrating sin(x)^2 and sin(x^2). There is no consensus on a single approach, and multiple competing methods are discussed.

Contextual Notes

Some participants note that the integral of sin(x^2) may not yield elementary functions, suggesting limitations in the methods discussed. The discussion also reflects varying levels of familiarity with integration techniques and identities.

Who May Find This Useful

This discussion may be useful for students and enthusiasts of calculus, particularly those interested in integration techniques and the challenges associated with specific integrals.

jmf322
Messages
18
Reaction score
0
the integral of sin(x)^2

I tried using all kinds of trigonometric identities, but they never seemed to make it easier. Any suggestions on what identities to use, or how to approach this? Thanks
 
Physics news on Phys.org
jmf322 said:
the integral of sin(x)^2

I tried using all kinds of trigonometric identities, but they never seemed to make it easier. Any suggestions on what identities to use, or how to approach this? Thanks
sin(x)^2=(1-cos(2x))/2
 
If it's [itex]\sin x^{2}[/itex] the function you wish to antidifferentiate, you can express the result in terms of a Fresnel integral, "S" if I'm not mistaking.

Daniel.
 
int of sin ^2 (x) dx = 1/2 x - 1/4 sin 2x + c
 
You're not supposed to give away the answer... tsk tsk
 
ru talking of sin(x)sin(x) or is it sin (x*x)? the 1st one seems quite easy...1-cos(2x) / 2 wud do it...for the second one...integrate by parts taking x^0 as the second function...then u will get sumthing like integral of x^2cos(x^2) in the second integral...integrate partially again...u will get LHS with a minus sign on the RHS(check it out...im not very sure...i did it in rough ;)) ... bring it over to LHS and finish it...check it out...im not so sure of my arithmetic.
 
I'm fairly sure that the second interpretation cannot be integrated by parts. As Daniel said, it requires the Fresnel integral, which integrals.com confirmed.

[tex]S_1(x) = \sqrt{\frac{{2}}{{\pi}}}\int_{0}^{t}\sin{x^2}dx[/tex]

I believe this is the one.
 
Last edited by a moderator:
Methodology...



Is this methodology correct?

[tex]\sin^2 x = \frac{1 - \cos (2x)}{2}[/tex]
[tex]\int \sin^2 x \; dx = \int \frac{1 - \cos (2x)}{2} dx = \int \frac{1}{2} dx - \int \frac{\cos (2x)}{2} dx[/tex]

[tex]\int \frac{1}{2} dx - \int \frac{\cos (2x)}{2} dx = \frac{1}{2} \int dx - \frac{1}{2} \int \cos (2x) dx[/tex]

[tex]\frac{1}{2} \int dx - \frac{1}{2} \int \cos (2x) dx = \frac{1}{2} \left( \int dx - \int \cos (2x) dx \right)[/tex]

[tex]\frac{1}{2} \left( \int dx - \int \cos (2x) dx \right) = \frac{1}{2} \left( x - \frac{\sin (2x)}{2} \right) + C[/tex]

[tex]\frac{1}{2} \left( x - \frac{\sin (2x)}{2} \right) + C = \frac{x}{2} - \frac{\sin (2x)}{4} + C[/tex]

[tex]\boxed{\int \sin^2 x \; dx = \frac{x}{2} - \frac{\sin (2x)}{4} + C}[/tex]
 
Last edited:
You should always insert the additive constant in an indefinite integral.

Daniel.
 
  • #10
Yes, the "+ C" is needed, but besides that you are correct. And you had a correct approach. That's a common Calc I question I believe.
 
  • #11
try parts. that's my favorite way.
 
  • #12
Methodology...



Mathematica Fresnel Integral definition:
[tex]S(z) = \int_0^z \sin \left( \frac{\pi t^2}{2} \right) dt[/tex]

[tex]\int \sin (x^2) dx = \sqrt{\frac{2}{\pi}} \int_0^t \sin (x^2) dx[/tex]

integrals.wolfram.com solution:
[tex]\boxed{\int \sin (x^2) \; dx = \sqrt{\frac{\pi}{2}} \cdot \text{FresnelS} \left[ \sqrt{\frac{2}{\pi}} x \right]}[/tex]

Is this methodology correct? and what intermediate steps are missing?

What is the integrals.wolfram.com mathematical solution written in symbolic form?


Reference:
https://www.physicsforums.com/showpost.php?p=676949&postcount=8
http://integrals.wolfram.com/
 
Last edited:
  • #13
for the integral sin^2(x) parts gives

int(sin^2(x)dx) = -cos(x)sin(x) + int(cos^2(x)dx)

= -cos(x)sin(x) + int(1 - sin^2(x)dx)

so 2 int(sin^2(x)dx) = x - cos(x) sin(x) +constant.

this way you do not need to have any tricky formulas at hand like

sin2 = (1/2)(1-cos(2x)), and the answer comes slightly simpler too.

sin(x^2) on the other hand is no easier than the famous e^(x^2).

intuition should suggest (by the product rule) that most functions of form

f(g(x)) that cannot be expanded or simplified are not going to occur as elementary derivatives.

with a bit of work one can do sqrt(1+x^2) but only because the substitution x = tan(u) simplifies it.

one cannot do sqrt(1+x^4) this way though. :smile:
 
Last edited:

Similar threads

  • · Replies 14 ·
Replies
14
Views
4K
  • · Replies 29 ·
Replies
29
Views
6K
  • · Replies 3 ·
Replies
3
Views
4K
  • · Replies 8 ·
Replies
8
Views
4K
  • · Replies 2 ·
Replies
2
Views
4K
  • · Replies 11 ·
Replies
11
Views
3K
  • · Replies 3 ·
Replies
3
Views
3K
  • · Replies 6 ·
Replies
6
Views
3K
  • · Replies 8 ·
Replies
8
Views
3K
  • · Replies 4 ·
Replies
4
Views
3K