A simple antidifferentiation question

  • Thread starter Thread starter chexmix
  • Start date Start date
Click For Summary

Homework Help Overview

The discussion revolves around a problem in single-variable calculus, specifically focusing on antidifferentiation techniques. The original poster expresses difficulty with a particular integral involving the secant function.

Discussion Character

  • Exploratory, Conceptual clarification, Mathematical reasoning

Approaches and Questions Raised

  • The original poster attempts to understand the antidifferentiation of \(\int \frac{2}{3} \sec^{2} \frac{x}{3} dx\) and questions whether there is a simpler method than substitution. Participants suggest checking the correctness of guessed forms and emphasize the importance of substitution techniques.

Discussion Status

Participants are actively engaging with the problem, offering insights into the use of substitution and the verification of antidifferentiation through differentiation. There is a recognition of the challenges faced in mastering these concepts, with some participants sharing their own experiences in calculus courses.

Contextual Notes

The original poster notes that integration by substitution has not yet been covered in their current textbook, which may limit their approach to the problem. There is also a sense of urgency as they prepare for upcoming coursework in calculus.

chexmix
Messages
8
Reaction score
0
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:

Homework Equations



a) \int sec^{2}x dx = tan x + C

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

The Attempt at a Solution



The first of these (a) makes sense since it was established earlier in the book that the derivative of tan x is sec^2 x. 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:

\frac{2}{3} \int sec^{2} \frac{x}{3} dx

... 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:
Physics news on Phys.org
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 \int sec^{2}x dx = tan x + C, so it stands to reason that \int sec^{2}(\frac{x}{3}) dx = tan (\frac{x}{3}) + C doesn't it? This isn't actually true though, so what you have to do now is differentiate tan (\frac{x}{3}) + C 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!
 
Screwdriver,

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

I would highly suggest learning substitutions though. They're pretty easy to understand and it removes the guessing aspect :smile:
 
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.
 
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:
 
I'm just trying everything I can right now to get through Calc II, that class is seriously a nightmare.
 
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.
 

Similar threads

  • · Replies 5 ·
Replies
5
Views
3K
Replies
3
Views
2K
Replies
2
Views
2K
Replies
6
Views
2K
  • · Replies 22 ·
Replies
22
Views
3K
  • · Replies 8 ·
Replies
8
Views
2K
  • · Replies 3 ·
Replies
3
Views
2K
  • · Replies 5 ·
Replies
5
Views
1K
  • · Replies 40 ·
2
Replies
40
Views
5K
  • · Replies 105 ·
4
Replies
105
Views
8K