1. Not finding help here? Sign up for a free 30min tutor trial with Chegg Tutors
    Dismiss Notice
Dismiss Notice
Join Physics Forums Today!
The friendliest, high quality science and math community on the planet! Everyone who loves science is here!

A doubt about double integration

  1. Aug 20, 2004 #1

    This is my first post. I´m writing here because I have a doubt regarding a solved problem of double integration present in a book of mine. I don´t speak english yet ( :frown: ), but I will try to translate the problem to english. Well, here I go:

    "Calculate int[ (x^2 + y^2) dx dy ] over the region D on the first quadrant of the xy-plane limitated by the hyperboles x^2 - y^2 = 1, x^2 - y^2 = 9, x*y = 2 and x*y = 4".

    Well, using the following transformation: u = x^2 - y^2, v = x*y; we obtain the following Jacobian: J(u,v) = 1 / ( 2 * (u^2 + 4*v^2)^(1/2) ).

    The region of integration Q on the uv-plane is the rectangle: Q = {(u,v) E R² | 1 <= u <= 9 , 2 <= v <= 4}.


    int[ (x^2 + y^2) dx dy ] = int[ (u^2 + 4*v^2) * ( 1 / ( 2 * (u^2 + 4*v^2)^(1/2) ) ) du dv ] = (1/2) * int[ du dv ] = 8.

    Well, I don´t understand this solution. If you plot the region Q, you will obtain a rectangle lying on the uv-plane, but this rectangle includes (through the previous change of coordinates) the two regions lying on the xy-plane that are limitated by the four hyperboles: the first one lying on the first quadrant, and the second one lying on the third quadrant. But I want only the region on the first quadrant. I can´t see how the definition of the rectangle Q could exclude the region on the third quadrant. And this region must to be excluded, because the change of coordinates must to be injective (otherwise I can´t use the previous method to calculate double integrals).

    I don´t know if you could understand what I wrote, or even if my doubt was clearly exposed (in case of my horrible english have been understood). But I thank in advance for any help! :smile:
  2. jcsd
  3. Aug 21, 2004 #2
    Theatre of Fate, welcome to physics forums!

    I don't speak english neither, so I wish you would understand what I say.

    I think what I get from your post is that you are not at all sure that the transformation you use is one-one (because each hyperbola has two disconnected components and each point in (u,v) seems to "correspond" to two points in (x,y) ) and so you are not sure that the "change of variable" formula for integration works.

    I think the point is that we may "restrict" the map/transformation to the first quadrant of the (x,y) plane. Then the map will be one-one and there will be no problem. Specifically, when calculating the Jacobian of the transformation, you need to express (x,y) in terms of (u,v). The transformation is, u = x^2 - y^2, v = x*y. When expressing (x,y) in (u,v), you will find that there is more than one solution (differring by +/- sign). We choose specifically the solution which maps (u,v) to the first quadrant of (x,y) plane and we will get the Jacobian as you mentioned.

    Hope that helps.
  4. Aug 21, 2004 #3
    Here's another question regarding double integration:

    I was reading through a proof showing that the area under the standard normal curve = 1, and there's one part of the proof I couldn't follow:

    [tex]I_{x} = \int_ {-\infty}^\infty \frac{1}{\sigma \sqrt{2 \pi}}e^{-\frac{(x-\mu)^2}{2\sigma^2}} dx [/tex]

    [tex]I_{y} = \int_ {-\infty}^\infty \frac{1}{\sigma \sqrt{2 \pi}}e^{-\frac{(y-\mu)^2}{2\sigma^2}} dy[/tex]

    Then you multiply [tex]I_{x}[/tex] with [tex]I_{y}[/tex]:
    [tex]I_{x} \cdot I_{y} = \int_ {-\infty}^\infty \frac{1}{\sigma \sqrt{2 \pi}}e^{-\frac{(x-\mu)^2}{2\sigma^2}} \int_ {-\infty}^\infty \frac{1}{\sigma \sqrt{2 \pi}}e^{-\frac{(y-\mu)^2}{2\sigma^2}} dxdy[/tex]

    Then the book goes on to say (or at least I think it says this since I don't have it with me now):

    Since I(x) and I(y) are the same except for the choice of variables:

    [tex]I^2 = \int_ {-\infty}^\infty \int_ {-\infty}^\infty \frac{1}{\sigma^2 2\pi}e^{\frac{-(x-\mu)^2-(y-\mu)^2}{2\sigma^2}[/tex]

    Why is the last step valid? I couldn't find a proof for it.
  5. Aug 21, 2004 #4

    Let me just say that you both speak English well enough to be easily understood. :biggrin:

  6. Aug 21, 2004 #5


    User Avatar
    Science Advisor
    Homework Helper
    Gold Member
    Dearly Missed

    Let's first look at a somewhat more general case:
    The assertion is that (for constants a,b,c,d):

    The equality between the 1. and the 2.&3. terms are consequences of Fubini's theorem (essentially, that double integrals can be computed stepwise; that is we may first integrate with respect to one variable, keeping the other constant, and after that, integrating with respect to the last variable)
    . The equality between the 2&3. terms and the 4.term is a consequence that the integral placed in parentheses within the other integral is a constant,
    which therefore may be extracted from the outer integral.
  7. Aug 25, 2004 #6
    Thanks for the reply, but could you explain this in more detail? I don't get what you are trying to say. Thanks.
  8. Aug 25, 2004 #7


    User Avatar
    Staff Emeritus
    Science Advisor

    Your English is excellent. Its my (put the language of your choice here) that is terrible!
  9. Jun 11, 2005 #8
    Wong, I thank you for the explanation!
Know someone interested in this topic? Share this thread via Reddit, Google+, Twitter, or Facebook

Have something to add?

Similar Discussions: A doubt about double integration
  1. Double integral (Replies: 6)