Maybe add this to the Integral Calculus tutorial....

In summary, by making a series of nested rectangles, we can approximate the area of a function between two points.
  • #1
Prove It
Gold Member
MHB
1,465
24
Reading the Integral Calculus tutorial, I felt like contributing. Do with it what you wish...

Proposition: You can evaluate areas exactly using Integrals.

Knowing that an integral is an antiderivative, and that derivatives are RATES, it seems odd that going in reverse would give geometric measurements.

To prove this proposition, we need to do some analysis of functions in general.First, we should note that a function can reach its global maxima and minima only at turning points and endpoints.

Theorem 1: The Extreme Value Theorem (given without proof due to how obvious it seems).

The Extreme Value Theorem states that for any function $\displaystyle f(x) $ defined over an interval $ \displaystyle x \in [\alpha, \beta]$ and continuous over $\displaystyle x \in (\alpha, \beta ) $, it must reach its maximum and minimum at some points in $\displaystyle x \in [\alpha, \beta]$Theorem 2: Rolle's Theorem (also obvious, but the proof follows nicely from the Extreme Value Theorem).

Rolle's Theorem states that if a function is defined over $\displaystyle x \in [a,b] $ and is continuous over $\displaystyle x \in (a, b)$, if the function has the same value at two points, i.e. if $\displaystyle f(a) = f(b) $, then there must be a turning point in between them, since at some point between them the function has to turn to go back to that function value.

Therefore, if $\displaystyle f(a) = f(b) $, then there exists some $\displaystyle c \in [a, b] $ such that $\displaystyle f'(c) = 0 $.

Proof: If the function's endpoints are $\displaystyle a, b $ and we have $\displaystyle f(a) = f(b) $, then if $\displaystyle f(a) $ is a global minimum, so is $\displaystyle f(b) $, and if $\displaystyle f(a) $ is a global maximum, so is $\displaystyle f(b) $. But by the Extreme Value Theorem, the function must reach its global maximum and minimum at some points in the interval. If $\displaystyle f(a) = f(b) $ is the global maximum, then there must be a turning point as the global minimum. If $\displaystyle f(a) = f(b) $ is the global minimum, then there must be a turning point as the global maximum. If $\displaystyle f(a) = f(b) $ is neither the global maximum or minimum, then there must be two turning points as the global maximum and minimum. Q.E.D.Theorem 3: The Mean Value Theorem

The Mean Value Theorem states that for any continuous and differentiable function over $\displaystyle x \in [a, b] $, the gradient of the chord between $\displaystyle a $ and $\displaystyle b $ is equal to the gradient of the tangent to the function at some point in between $\displaystyle a $ and $\displaystyle b $.


In symbols: $ \displaystyle \frac{f(b) - f(a)}{b - a} = f'(c) $ for some $\displaystyle c \in [a, b] $

Proof (from Wikipedia):

Define $\displaystyle g(x) = f(x) − rx $, where $r$ is a constant. Since $f$ is continuous on $[a, b]$ and differentiable on $(a, b)$, the same is true for $g$. We now want to choose $r$ so that $g$ satisfies the conditions of Rolle's theorem. Namely

\[ \displaystyle \begin{align*} g(a) &= g(b) \\ f(a) - r\,a &= f(b) - r\,b \\ r(b - a) &= f(b) - f(a) \\ r &= \frac{f(b) - f(a)}{b - a} \end{align*} \]

By Rolle's theorem, since $g$ is continuous and $g(a) = g(b)$, there is some $c$ in $(a, b)$ for which $\displaystyle g'(c) = 0 $, and it follows from the equality $g(x) = f(x) − r\,x$ that

\[\begin{align*}\displaystyle g'(x) &= f'(x) - r \\ g'(c) &= f'(c) - r \\ 0 &= f'(c) - r \\ r &= f'(c) \\ \frac{f(b) - f(a)}{b - a} &= f'(c) \end{align*}\]

as required. Q.E.D.Note, we can rearrange the equation from the Mean Value Theorem as $\displaystyle f(b) - f(a) = (b - a)f'(c) $. We will refer back to this later. Now to prove our original proposition...

If we want to evaluate the area underneath a function $\displaystyle f(x) $ between $\displaystyle x = a $ and $\displaystyle x = b $. Start by making $\displaystyle n $ subdivisions on your interval and marking the midpoint of each, so that $\displaystyle a = x_0 < m_1 < x_1 < m_2 < x_2 < \dots < m_n < x_n = b $.


Then rectangles can be drawn of length $= x_i - x_{i-1}$ and width $= f(m_i)$, so that their area $= (x_i - x_{i-1})\,f(m_i)$.

Then the area bounded by the curve and the $x$ axis between $x = a$ and $x = b$ can be approximated as $ \displaystyle A \approx \sum_{i = 1}^n \,(x_i - x_{i-1})\,f(m_i) $.

By making more subdivisions (making $n \to \infty$), this sum converges upon the true area.


So $ \displaystyle A = \lim_{n \to \infty} \sum_{i = 1}^n \,(x_i - x_{i-1})\,f(m_i).$

If we define $f(x)$ as the derivative of another function $F(x)$, the summand can be simplified using the Mean Value Theorem. In other words $\displaystyle F'(x) = f(x) \,\,\,\,\,\textrm{or}\,\,\,\,\, F(x) = \int{f(x)\,dx}$.

Remembering from the Mean Value Theorem that $(b-a)\,f'(c) = f(b) - f(a)$ for some $c \in (a,b)$, that means by making $n \to \infty$, the midpoint of each interval will become the only point in between each subinterval, and thus $\displaystyle (x_i - x_{i-1})\,f(m_i) = F(x_i) - F(x_{i-1}) $.

Substituting into the formula for the area gives

\[ \displaystyle \begin{align*}
A &=\lim_{n \to \infty}\sum_{i = 1}^n \,(x_i - x_{i-1})\,f(m_i)\\
&= \lim_{n \to \infty}\sum_{i = 1}^n\, \left[F(x_i) - F(x_{i-1})\right]\\
&= \lim_{n \to \infty} \left\{\, \left[F(x_1) - F(x_0)\right]+\left[F(x_2) - F(x_1)\right]+ \left[ F(x_3) - F(x_2) \right] + \dots + \left[ F(x_n) - F(x_{n-1}) \right] \right\} \\
&= \lim_{n \to \infty} \left[ F(x_n) - F(x_0) \right] \\
&= F(x_n) - F(x_0) \\
&= F(b) - F(a) \end{align*}\]So, in order to exactly evaluate the area underneath a curve $\displaystyle f(x) $ between $\displaystyle x = a $ and $\displaystyle x = b $, one needs to evaluate an antiderivative of $\displaystyle f(x) $ at $\displaystyle x= b $, and then subtract the value of the same antiderivative at $\displaystyle x = a $. In other words, if $\displaystyle F(x) $ is an antiderivative of $\displaystyle f(x) $, then:

\[ \displaystyle \begin{align*} A &= \int_a^b{f(x)\,dx} \\ &= F(b) - F(a) \end{align*} \]
 

Attachments

  • 438px-Lagrange_mean_value_theorem.svg.png
    438px-Lagrange_mean_value_theorem.svg.png
    3.4 KB · Views: 41
  • area1.JPG
    area1.JPG
    23 KB · Views: 43
  • area4.JPG
    area4.JPG
    20.9 KB · Views: 45
  • area3.JPG
    area3.JPG
    29.9 KB · Views: 44
  • area2.JPG
    area2.JPG
    27.4 KB · Views: 45
Last edited:
Physics news on Phys.org
  • #2
Prove It said:
Theorem 1: The Extreme Value Theorem (given without proof due to how obvious it seems).

The Extreme Value Theorem states that for any function $\displaystyle f(x) $ defined over an interval $ \displaystyle x \in [\alpha, \beta]$, it must reach its maximum and minimum at some points in $\displaystyle x \in [\alpha, \beta]$

... so that this function must have at least a maximun and a minimum in $\displaystyle x \in [-1,1]$?...

$\displaystyle f(x)= \begin{cases} \frac{1}{x}\ \text{if }\ -1\le x \le1\ , x \ne 0 \\ 0\ \text{if}\ x=0 \end{cases}$ (1)

Kind regards

$\chi$ $\sigma$
 
  • #3
chisigma said:
... so that this function must have at least a maximun and a minimum in $\displaystyle x \in [-1,1]$?...

$\displaystyle f(x)= \begin{cases} \frac{1}{x}\ \text{if }\ -1\le x \le1\ , x \ne 0 \\ 0\ \text{if}\ x=0 \end{cases}$ (1)

Kind regards

$\chi$ $\sigma$

Don't be picky :P I obviously meant defined and continuous on the entire interval.
 
  • #4
The integral calculus tutorial is a work in progress. The very next post, which is in draft form at the moment, covers much of this.

I'll tell you what: why don't you start on a Multi-variable Calculus tutorial? That way, we won't be duplicating effort.
 
  • #5
Ackbach said:
The integral calculus tutorial is a work in progress. The very next post, which is in draft form at the moment, covers much of this.

I'll tell you what: why don't you start on a Multi-variable Calculus tutorial? That way, we won't be duplicating effort.

Because multivariable calculus isn't really my strong suit...
 
  • #6
Prove It said:
Because multivariable calculus isn't really my strong suit...

Well, there's nothing like teaching a subject for packing down your own knowledge of it. I've certainly found that to be the case.
 
  • #7
Ackbach said:
The integral calculus tutorial is a work in progress. The very next post, which is in draft form at the moment, covers much of this...

I read and appreciate very much the integral calculus tutorial You wrote in calculus section, especially for the fact that it is 'educationally' very effective. If I can do a suggestion it would be very useful to insert at the end a section dedicated to Riemann and Lebesgue integration, a 'duality' that has never been for me full clear...

Kind regards

$\chi$ $\sigma$
 
  • #8
chisigma said:
I read and appreciate very much the integral calculus tutorial You wrote in calculus section, especially for the fact that it is 'educationally' very effective. If I can do a suggestion it would be very useful to insert at the end a section dedicated to Riemann and Lebesgue integration, a 'duality' that has never been for me full clear...

Kind regards

$\chi$ $\sigma$

I'll keep that in mind. I have an explanation or two that might help to make sense out of it all.
 

1. What is integral calculus?

Integral calculus is a branch of mathematics that deals with finding the area under a curve or the accumulation of a quantity over a given interval. It involves techniques for solving problems related to continuous change and motion, such as computing the velocity and acceleration of an object.

2. How is integral calculus different from differential calculus?

Differential calculus focuses on finding the rate of change of a function, while integral calculus deals with the accumulation of that change over a given interval. In other words, differential calculus deals with the slope of a curve, while integral calculus deals with the area under the curve.

3. What are the applications of integral calculus?

Integral calculus has numerous applications in fields such as physics, engineering, economics, and statistics. It is used to solve problems related to optimization, motion, growth, and decay, among others.

4. What are the basic techniques for solving integrals?

The basic techniques for solving integrals include substitution, integration by parts, and trigonometric substitution. Other methods such as partial fraction decomposition and trigonometric identities can also be used for more complicated integrals.

5. How can I improve my skills in integral calculus?

Practice is key to improving your skills in integral calculus. Make sure to understand the fundamental concepts, and solve a variety of problems to gain familiarity with different techniques. Also, try to visualize the problem and break it down into smaller parts to make it more manageable.

Similar threads

  • Calculus
Replies
6
Views
1K
Replies
2
Views
1K
Replies
16
Views
2K
Replies
24
Views
2K
Replies
14
Views
1K
Replies
3
Views
1K
Replies
20
Views
2K
Replies
4
Views
1K
Back
Top