Infinite series by integration by parts

AI Thread Summary
The discussion revolves around a hypothesis regarding the integration of products of functions using integration by parts. It proposes that if the limit of the product of the (n+1)th anti-derivative of one function and the nth derivative of another approaches zero over continuous intervals, then the integral of their product can be expressed as an infinite series involving alternating signs. The conversation explores the application of the Mean Value Theorem to support this hypothesis and discusses the implications if the limits do not converge to zero. Concerns are raised about the behavior of the limits when they are finite or infinite, suggesting a need for further exploration on how to handle such cases. The thread seeks assistance in proving the hypothesis under these varying conditions.
disregardthat
Science Advisor
Messages
1,864
Reaction score
34
Hi, I wonder if this hypothesis is true:

Let f_n be an arbitrarily chosen n'th anti-derivative of the function f_0. Similarly, let g_n be the n'th derivative of the function g_0.

Now, \int^b_a f_0 g_0 \rm{d}x=[f_1g_0]^b_a-\int^b_a f_1g_1 \rm{d}x=[f_1g_0-f_2g_1+...]^b_a+(-1)^n \int^b_a f_{n+1}g_n \rm{d}x.

hypothesis:

If \lim_{n \to \infty} f_{n+1}g_n =0 for all continuous intervals of and never diverges. Then

\int^b_a f_0 g_0 \rm{d}x = [\sum^{\infty}_{n=0} (-1)^n f_{n+1}g_n]^b_a

This seems intuitively correct, but I wonder how to prove it.
 
Last edited:
Mathematics news on Phys.org
I'm thinking Mean Value Theorem. The integral equals \epsilon(b-a)(f_{n+1}g_n)|_{x=c} for some c in the interval [a, b] and 0 \leq \epsilon \leq 1 which approaches zero.
 
this was double post, sorry
 
Last edited:
Excellent, thank you.

We have by induction that

\int^b_a f_0g_0 \rm{d}x = [\sum^{n-1}_{k=0} (-1)^kf_{k+1}g_{k}]^b_a+(-1)^n\int^b_af_{n+1}g_n \rm{d}x=[\sum^{n-1}_{k=0} (-1)^kf_{k+1}g_{k}]^b_a+(b-a)(f_{n+1} \circ g_n)(t)

For some t \in [a,b], and any non-negative integer n.

However, \lim_{n \to \infty} (f_{n+1} \circ g_{n} )(t)=0 is given, so

\int^b_a f_0g_0 \rm{d}x = \lim_{n \to \infty} \int^b_a f_0g_0 \rm{d}x= \lim_{n \to \infty} [\sum^{n-1}_{k=0} (-1)^kf_{k+1}g_{k}]^b_a+(-1)^n\int^b_af_{n+1}g_n \rm{d}x=\lim_{n \to \infty}[\sum^{n-1}_{k=0} (-1)^kf_{k+1}g_{k}]^b_a+(b-a)(f_{n+1} \circ g_n)(t)=[\sum^{\infty}_{k=0} (-1)^kf_{k+1}g_{k}]^b_a

But this is not so obvious if \lim_{n \to \infty} (f_{n+1} \circ g_{n} )(t) not always equal 0 i.e. is finite for discrete values of x, or if either of the limits are infinite. Can someone help me there?

Perhaps if the limits are infinite, we can let n tend towards infinity at a rate which make f_{n+1}g_n dominate a limit, say b i.e. so \lim_{b,n \to \infty} b \cdot f_{n+1}g_n = 0 Can we choose it to be like that?
 
Last edited:
Insights auto threads is broken atm, so I'm manually creating these for new Insight articles. In Dirac’s Principles of Quantum Mechanics published in 1930 he introduced a “convenient notation” he referred to as a “delta function” which he treated as a continuum analog to the discrete Kronecker delta. The Kronecker delta is simply the indexed components of the identity operator in matrix algebra Source: https://www.physicsforums.com/insights/what-exactly-is-diracs-delta-function/ by...
Suppose ,instead of the usual x,y coordinate system with an I basis vector along the x -axis and a corresponding j basis vector along the y-axis we instead have a different pair of basis vectors ,call them e and f along their respective axes. I have seen that this is an important subject in maths My question is what physical applications does such a model apply to? I am asking here because I have devoted quite a lot of time in the past to understanding convectors and the dual...
Thread 'Imaginary Pythagoras'
I posted this in the Lame Math thread, but it's got me thinking. Is there any validity to this? Or is it really just a mathematical trick? Naively, I see that i2 + plus 12 does equal zero2. But does this have a meaning? I know one can treat the imaginary number line as just another axis like the reals, but does that mean this does represent a triangle in the complex plane with a hypotenuse of length zero? Ibix offered a rendering of the diagram using what I assume is matrix* notation...
Back
Top