1. Limited time only! Sign up for a free 30min personal 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 simple antidifferentiation question

  1. Aug 16, 2011 #1
    I am brushing up my single-variable calculus, partly by working my way through the 9th edition of Thomas and Finney's Calculus and Analytic Geometry. I'm finding myself stuck at an early problem in antidifferentiation:

    2. Relevant equations

    a) [itex]\int sec^{2}x dx = tan x + C[/itex]

    b) [itex]\int \frac{2}{3} sec^{2} \frac{x}{3} dx = 2 tan (\frac{x}{3}) + C[/itex]

    3. The attempt at a solution

    The first of these (a) makes sense since it was established earlier in the book that the derivative of [itex]tan x[/itex] is [itex]sec^2 x[/itex]. However, getting from problem to solution in (b) is confounding me and I am sure I am missing something very simple.

    I tried researching this with Wolfram Alpha, and the steps it used to reach the solution included integration by substitution, a topic that has not been covered yet in Thomas / Finney.

    Is there a simpler way to antidifferentiate (b)? My first step is to move the constant in front:

    [itex]\frac{2}{3} \int sec^{2} \frac{x}{3} dx[/itex]

    ... but after that I don't see a way besides substitution (which I remember from my first pass through this material over a year ago).

    Thanks,

    Glenn
     
    Last edited: Aug 16, 2011
  2. jcsd
  3. Aug 16, 2011 #2
    Well my good man, if you can't make a substitution, you can one of its crude forms, which is basically just guessing and checking. You know that [itex]\int sec^{2}x dx = tan x + C[/itex], so it stands to reason that [itex]\int sec^{2}(\frac{x}{3}) dx = tan (\frac{x}{3}) + C[/itex] doesn't it? This isn't actually true though, so what you have to do now is differentiate [itex]tan (\frac{x}{3}) + C[/itex] and see what you need to multiply it by to "fix" it. Remember that you can always check anti-differentiation by differentiation, so try that!
     
  4. Aug 16, 2011 #3
    Screwdriver,

    Thanks for the reply. I guess I was looking for some bit of magic that doesn't exist! :biggrin:
     
  5. Aug 16, 2011 #4
    You're welcome, chexmix!

    I would highly suggest learning substitutions though. They're pretty easy to understand and it removes the guessing aspect :smile:
     
  6. Aug 16, 2011 #5
    Yeah I would DEFINITELY learn u substitutions. I'm about 3/4 through the way of my Calc II class and I couldn't imagine not being able to use these u subs.
     
  7. Aug 17, 2011 #6
    Substitutions are definitely on my list.

    I have had Calc I and II (though it was a year ago) and am now reviewing everything for a stab at Calc III in the Fall. I'm running out of review time, so things are getting a little frantic! :eek:
     
  8. Aug 18, 2011 #7
    I'm just trying everything I can right now to get through Calc II, that class is seriously a nightmare.:yuck:
     
  9. Aug 18, 2011 #8
    I can't say I made a fantastic showing in either Calc I or II.

    ... but I had been away from math for 28 years when I started again with Pre-Calc a couple of years ago, so I try to be kind to myself.
     
Know someone interested in this topic? Share this thread via Reddit, Google+, Twitter, or Facebook




Similar Discussions: A simple antidifferentiation question
  1. Simple Simple question (Replies: 1)

  2. Simple question (Replies: 7)

  3. Simple question (Replies: 4)

Loading...