A question about variables of integration

  • Context: Undergrad 
  • Thread starter Thread starter Rick16
  • Start date Start date
Click For Summary

Discussion Overview

The discussion revolves around the integration of a differential equation involving the Lorentz factor and velocity in the context of physics. Participants explore the validity of variable substitution in integration and the implications of the dependence of the Lorentz factor on velocity.

Discussion Character

  • Mathematical reasoning
  • Conceptual clarification

Main Points Raised

  • One participant presents an equation involving the Lorentz factor and questions whether they can treat the term ##d(\gamma v^x)## as a variable of integration without further considerations.
  • Another participant argues that substitutions are not necessary and cites the fundamental theorem of calculus to support their view on the integration process.
  • A third participant describes the integration process, showing that it leads to the same result as the textbook solution, while also making a substitution for clarity.
  • A fourth participant expresses that the substitution helped clarify their understanding of the integral, indicating that the original form seemed odd to them.

Areas of Agreement / Disagreement

Participants express differing views on the necessity of substitution in the integration process. Some believe it is essential for clarity, while others argue it is not required. The discussion remains unresolved regarding the best approach to take.

Contextual Notes

Participants express uncertainty about the implications of the Lorentz factor's dependence on velocity and how it affects the integration process.

Rick16
Messages
158
Reaction score
46
TL;DR
an integral with a strange variable of integration
I have the equation ##F^x=m\frac {d}{dt}(\gamma v^x)##, where ##\gamma## is the Lorentz factor, and ##x## is a superscript, not an exponent. In my textbook the solution is given as ##\frac {F^x}{m}t=\frac {v^x}{\sqrt {1-v^{x^2}/c^2}}##.

What bothers me is, when I separate the variables I get ##\frac {F^x}{m}dt=d(\gamma v^x)##. Can I simply consider ##d(\gamma v^x)## the variable of integration without any further considerations? Can I simply make the substitution ##\gamma v^x = u## and then write ##\frac {F^x}{m}\int_0^t\,dt=\int_0^u\,du##? The solution would then be ##\frac {F^x}{m}t=u=\gamma v^x## as in the book. Is it really that simple? I feel uneasy about this because of the twofold dependence of ##\gamma v^x## on ##v^x##.
 
Physics news on Phys.org
I don't think you have to make any substitutions. In general, if:
$$f(t) = \frac{d}{dt}g(t)$$Then, by the fundamental theorem of calculus:
$$\int f(t) dt = \int \frac{d}{dt}g(t) dt = g(t) + C$$Or, in terms of the definite integral:
$$\int_{t_0}^{t_1} f(t) dt = \int_{t_0}^{t_1}\frac{d}{dt}g(t) dt = g(t_1) - g(t_0)$$
 
This is the typical example of integration: It looks awkward, but it works. What we have is
\begin{align*}
\dfrac{F^x}{m}&=\dfrac{d}{dt}\left(\gamma v^x\right)\\
\int \dfrac{F^x}{m}\,dt&=\int \dfrac{d}{dt}\left(\gamma v^x\right)\,dt \\
\dfrac{F^x}{m}\cdot t&\stackrel{u=\gamma v^x}{=}\int u'\cdot \dfrac{du}{u'}=\int du\\
\dfrac{F^x}{m}\cdot t&=u=\gamma v^x
\end{align*}
 
I made the substitution because without it my integral looked like this: ##\int d(\gamma v^x)##, which I found was a very odd looking integral. If instead I write it as ##\int \frac {d}{dt}(\gamma v^x)\,dt##, it does not look odd anymore and it all makes sense. Problem solved, thank you very much.
 

Similar threads

  • · Replies 2 ·
Replies
2
Views
1K
  • · Replies 2 ·
Replies
2
Views
3K
  • · Replies 1 ·
Replies
1
Views
2K
  • · Replies 2 ·
Replies
2
Views
3K
  • · Replies 2 ·
Replies
2
Views
3K
  • · Replies 9 ·
Replies
9
Views
3K
  • · Replies 5 ·
Replies
5
Views
2K
  • · Replies 7 ·
Replies
7
Views
4K
  • · Replies 0 ·
Replies
0
Views
1K
  • · Replies 4 ·
Replies
4
Views
2K