- #1
n0_3sc
- 243
- 1
When it comes to integration of some function f(t) where t is real, I would just treat everything as a constant and integrate it.
Even with complex functions f(t) = u(t) + iv(t) why can't I just treat i as a constant and just integrate?
Here is an example:
[tex]\int_{0}^{\pi/2}e^{t+it}dt[/tex]
What's wrong with imaginary i being an ordinary constant giving you an easy answer of:
[tex](1+i)e^{\frac{\pi}{2}(1+i)} - (1+i)[/tex]
Whereas treating the function as two separate quantities, "real" and "imag" would require integration by parts giving a different answer (I know there is a simpler integration method but that's beside the point).
My main question is what is the physical interpretation of the two methods? I was never taught complex integration so I don't know.
Thanks guys.
Even with complex functions f(t) = u(t) + iv(t) why can't I just treat i as a constant and just integrate?
Here is an example:
[tex]\int_{0}^{\pi/2}e^{t+it}dt[/tex]
What's wrong with imaginary i being an ordinary constant giving you an easy answer of:
[tex](1+i)e^{\frac{\pi}{2}(1+i)} - (1+i)[/tex]
Whereas treating the function as two separate quantities, "real" and "imag" would require integration by parts giving a different answer (I know there is a simpler integration method but that's beside the point).
My main question is what is the physical interpretation of the two methods? I was never taught complex integration so I don't know.
Thanks guys.