I think there is a mistake on Wikipedia about the integral of csch

In summary, there is a discrepancy in the solutions for the integral of csch(x) on Wikipedia, with one solution having the terms swapped around the division operator. However, both solutions are valid up to a constant of integration, and the correctness of an integral can be verified by differentiating it.
  • #1
swampwiz
571
83
I am looking at the formulae for the integral of csch( x ) at Wikipedia.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_integrals_of_hyperbolic_functions

and it seems that there is a mistake, specially the solution of (presume a is 1 here for simplicity)

ln | [ ( cosh( x ) - 1 ] / sinh( x ) ]

while there is also

ln | sinh( x ) / [ ( cosh( x ) + 1 ] |

the latter of which I get. The issue is that the solution to this latter one results in the former, only with terms swapped around the division operator.

Here is my derivation for them:

csch( x ) = csch2( x ) / [ csch2( x ) ]1/2

= csch2( x ) / [ coth2( x ) - 1 ]1/2

u = coth( x )

du = - csch2( x )

csch( x ) dx = - ( u2 - 1 )( - 1/2 )

∫ - ( u2 - 1 )( - 1/2 ) = - ln | u + ( u2 - 1 )1/2 | + C

= - ln | coth( x ) + [ coth2( x ) - 1 ]1/2 | + C

= - ln | coth( x ) + [ { csch2( x ) } ]1/2 | + C = - ln | coth( x ) + csch( x ) | + C

= - ln | [ cosh( x ) / sinh( x ) ] + [ 1 / sinh( x ) ] | + C

= - ln | [ cosh( x ) + 1 ] / sinh( x ) | + C

= ln | sinh( x ) / [ cosh( x ) + 1 ] | + C

So I get one the solutions, but not the other, which as I had said, seems to have the terms swapped around the division operator.

I presume that it is proper to consider the square root of something to be +.
 
Physics news on Phys.org
  • #2
The square root of a positive real number is defined to be the positive number whose square is that positive real number only, as a function can only have one value. So the square root of csc2(x) would be the absolute value of csc(x), or |csc(x)|. As such, your first equation is false: the hyperbolic cosecant of ln(1/2) is -4/3, but the fraction on the right side of your equation gives us only 4/3.
In order to verify that an expression is an integral of another expression, we only need to differentiate it, as there are many ways to express the same quantity, and our derivation may not match the author's derivation, even though the resulting quantities may be the same up to a constant of integration.
If we differentiate ln | [ ( cosh( x ) - 1 ] / sinh( x ) ], we get csch(x), so this is a valid integral, up to a constant of integration. Whether we can find a series of integration techniques that leads us to that particular expression is a secondary issue. Sometimes, for example, but probably not in this case, the integral is merely an educated guess, whose derivative checks out, and thus must be equal to the integral up to a constant of integration, by the fundamental theorem of calculus.
 
Last edited:

1. What is the integral of csch?

The integral of csch is a mathematical function that represents the inverse hyperbolic cosecant function. It is often denoted as ∫csch(x)dx.

2. How is the integral of csch different from the integral of sinh?

The integral of csch and sinh are different because they are the inverse functions of different trigonometric functions. The integral of csch involves the inverse hyperbolic cosecant function, while the integral of sinh involves the inverse hyperbolic sine function.

3. Is the integral of csch defined for all values of x?

Yes, the integral of csch is defined for all real values of x. However, the value of the integral may be undefined for certain values of x, such as x = 0, where the function approaches infinity.

4. How can I calculate the integral of csch?

The integral of csch can be calculated using integration techniques such as u-substitution or integration by parts. It can also be calculated using computer software or online calculators.

5. What should I do if I think there is a mistake about the integral of csch on Wikipedia?

If you believe there is a mistake about the integral of csch on Wikipedia, you can reach out to the editors and contributors of the page to discuss and potentially correct the error. You can also provide evidence and sources to support your claim and request for the mistake to be corrected.

Similar threads

  • Calculus
Replies
5
Views
1K
Replies
8
Views
194
  • Calculus and Beyond Homework Help
Replies
14
Views
264
Replies
3
Views
343
Replies
5
Views
1K
Replies
8
Views
437
Replies
6
Views
887
  • Calculus and Beyond Homework Help
Replies
2
Views
467
  • Atomic and Condensed Matter
Replies
1
Views
1K
Back
Top