A limit of an integral question

  • Thread starter Thread starter transgalactic
  • Start date Start date
  • Tags Tags
    Integral Limit
Click For Summary

Homework Help Overview

The discussion revolves around evaluating a limit involving an integral, specifically addressing the 0/0 indeterminate form that arises. Participants explore the implications of taking the derivative of the integral and the presence of an additional variable.

Discussion Character

  • Exploratory, Assumption checking, Mathematical reasoning

Approaches and Questions Raised

  • Participants discuss the derivative of the integral and its relation to the function under the integral sign, questioning how to handle the variable involved. There are mentions of integrating by parts and the potential use of gamma functions, alongside considerations of approximations.

Discussion Status

There is a mix of attempts to clarify the process of differentiation under the integral sign and the challenges posed by the integral's complexity. Some participants provide guidance on the theorem related to derivatives of integrals, while others express uncertainty about specific steps and interpretations.

Contextual Notes

Participants note the difficulty in solving the integral in terms of elementary functions, leading to discussions about alternative representations and the implications of the 0/0 form in the limit evaluation.

transgalactic
Messages
1,386
Reaction score
0
http://img225.imageshack.us/my.php?image=29117598dh7.png

i know that the integral of 0 to 0 interval equals to 0.

i get 0/0 form

how do i make the derivative of this integral

i know the it should cancel out the integral sign
but there is another variable "t"

what should i do in this
case??

another way that i thought of is
to solve this integral and then solve the limit
 
Last edited:
Physics news on Phys.org
transgalactic said:
http://img225.imageshack.us/my.php?image=29117598dh7.png

i know that the integral of 0 to 0 interval equals to 0.

i get 0/0 form

how do i make the derivative of this integral

i know the it should cancel out the integral sign
but there is another variable "t"

what should i do in this
case??

another way that i thought of is
to solve this integral and then solve the limit
Yeah just take the derivative of the integral, and the result will be the exact function under the integral sign, but now instead of the variable t, the result should contain the variable x. this is a well known theorem, and it can be proven, but it requres a little work.

So when u take the derivative of the integral on the denominator the result will be
ln(1+x^{2})
 
By the way, you cannot actually solve the integral, because it does not have an elementary function, you just can express in terms of some gamma function, or just find an approximation for it. But there is no close form of it.
 
Last edited:
sutupidmath said:
By the way, you cannot actually solve the integral, because it does not have an elementary function, you just can express in terms of some gamma function, or just find an approximation for it. But there is no close form of it.

Actually this is not true. Integrating by parts you can calulate the integral

\int \ln(1+x^2)\,d\,x=x\,\ln(1+x^2)-2\int \frac{x^2}{1+x^2}\,d\,x=x\,\ln(1+x^2)-2\int \frac{1+x^2}{1+x^2}\,d\,x+2\,\int\frac{d\,x}{1+x^2}=x\,\ln(1+x^2)-2\,x+2\,\arctan x

But for the OP, you don't have to do this! :smile:
 
Rainbow Child said:
Actually this is not true. Integrating by parts you can calulate the integral

\int \ln(1+x^2)\,d\,x=x\,\ln(1+x^2)-2\int \frac{x^2}{1+x^2}\,d\,x=x\,\ln(1+x^2)-2\int \frac{1+x^2}{1+x^2}\,d\,x+2\,\int\frac{d\,x}{1+x^2}=x\,\ln(1+x^2)-2\,x+2\,\arctan x

But for the OP, you don't have to do this! :smile:
Pardone me! I was thinking of completely something else! Yeah, you are so right, it actually is just an easy thing to do, but i had something else in my mind, i mean another function, when i said that. My bad lol, i appologize for not paying so much attention to things!
Thnx for pointing this out by the way.
 
... i appologize for not paying so much attention to things!

Do not! That's what makes us humans! :smile:
 
sutupidmath said:
Yeah just take the derivative of the integral, and the result will be the exact function under the integral sign, but now instead of the variable t, the result should contain the variable x. this is a well known theorem, and it can be proven, but it requires a little work.

I believe that's a little something called the Fundamental Theorem of Calculus =]
 
Gib Z said:
I believe that's a little something called the Fundamental Theorem of Calculus =]
Well maybe it is, but i am not used with English notation or naming of theorems. But i know how we call it in my native language, and we did not call it The Fundamental Theorem of Calculus, i mean even if we translated this into my language.
 
O sorry my bad! I didn't know english was not your first language. Your english is very good =]
 
  • #10
Gib Z said:
O sorry my bad! I didn't know english was not your first language. Your english is very good =]
Well no need to appologize, and thnx for commenting on my English!
 
  • #12
That indeed is correct.
 
  • #13
thanks
 
  • #14
  • #15
Do you think they'll ever develop a drug that cures my stupidity? I was specifically checking that for errors and I didn't see that. Sigh
 
  • #16
damn chain rule
 

Similar threads

Replies
2
Views
2K
  • · Replies 4 ·
Replies
4
Views
1K
Replies
24
Views
3K
  • · Replies 5 ·
Replies
5
Views
2K
  • · Replies 16 ·
Replies
16
Views
3K
  • · Replies 2 ·
Replies
2
Views
2K
Replies
2
Views
2K
  • · Replies 23 ·
Replies
23
Views
2K
  • · Replies 2 ·
Replies
2
Views
2K
Replies
7
Views
2K