Calculate numerically the area

  • Context: MHB 
  • Thread starter Thread starter mathmari
  • Start date Start date
  • Tags Tags
    Area
Click For Summary

Discussion Overview

The discussion revolves around calculating the area between the graphs of two functions, specifically \( f(x)=\frac{1}{3}(x-2)^2e^{x/3} \) and \( p(x)=-\frac{2}{3}x+\frac{4}{3} \), focusing on their intersection points and numerical integration methods to find the area between them.

Discussion Character

  • Exploratory
  • Mathematical reasoning

Main Points Raised

  • Some participants suggest calculating the intersection points numerically, possibly using Newton's method.
  • Others propose that the intersection points might be "nice" or simple values, specifically \( x=0 \) and \( x=2 \).
  • It is noted that \( f(x) \) is complex due to the exponential component, making it challenging to match with a linear function.
  • Participants identify special cases where the function equals zero or one, which coincide with the intersection points.
  • There is a clarification that calculating the area refers to numerical integration rather than finding roots of the functions.
  • One participant mentions that there are limited values where an exponential and a polynomial can be equal, highlighting specific values that work.
  • Another participant inquires about the best numerical integration method for this scenario, suggesting the trapezoidal rule as a potential approach.

Areas of Agreement / Disagreement

Participants generally agree on the intersection points being \( x=0 \) and \( x=2 \) and the complexity of the function \( f(x) \). However, there is no consensus on the best numerical integration method, as suggestions vary.

Contextual Notes

Participants discuss the nature of the functions involved and the implications for numerical methods, but there are unresolved aspects regarding the choice of integration technique and the accuracy of the area calculation.

mathmari
Gold Member
MHB
Messages
4,984
Reaction score
7
Hey! :o

The functions \begin{equation*}f(x)=\frac{1}{3}(x-2)^2e^{x/3} \ \text{ and } \ p(x)=-\frac{2}{3}x+\frac{4}{3}\end{equation*} have exactly two real intersection points at the region $x\geq 0$.

Calculate numerically the area that is between the graphs of these two functions, with accuracy of two decimal digits. For that do we have to claulate numerically the intersections points, using for example Newton's methos? (Wondering)
 
Physics news on Phys.org
Hey mathmari!

We could, but perhaps the intersection points are "nice" points.

What are the potentially nice points? (Wondering)
 
Klaas van Aarsen said:
We could, but perhaps the intersection points are "nice" points.

What are the potentially nice points? (Wondering)

You mean checking it from the graph? Then we have the intersection points $x=0$ and $x=2$, right? (Wondering)
 
mathmari said:
You mean checking it from the graph? Then we have the intersection points $x=0$ and $x=2$, right?

That works. (Nod)

Note that $f(x)=\frac{1}{3}(x-2)^2e^{x/3}$ is hard to match with a line, since it has an exponential function in it.
However, there are 2 special cases.
1. When $(x-2)=0$ the function is zero because the polynomial factor is zero.
2. When $x=0$ the exponential function is $1$.

Turns out that those specials cases coincide with the points of intersection. (Thinking)
 
Klaas van Aarsen said:
That works. (Nod)

Note that $f(x)=\frac{1}{3}(x-2)^2e^{x/3}$ is hard to match with a line, since it has an exponential function in it.
However, there are 2 special cases.
1. When $(x-2)=0$ the function is zero because the polynomial factor is zero.
2. When $x=0$ the exponential function is $1$.

Turns out that those specials cases coincide with the points of intersection. (Thinking)

So this is an other approach to give the intersection points, isn't? (Wondering)

To calculate numerically the area is referring to a numerical integration method and not a numerical method to find the roots, right? (Wondering)
 
mathmari said:
So this is an other approach to give the intersection points, isn't?

To calculate numerically the area is referring to a numerical integration method and not a numerical method to find the roots, right?

Yep. (Nod)
 
I think Klaas Vanaarsen's point was that there are not many values that will make an exponential and a polynomial the same. But one would be to make the coefficient of the exponential 0 so the exponential disappears. The coefficient is x- 2 so we try x= 2 and find that it works. The other is the value x= 0 because then e^{x/2}= e^0= 1, an easy number!
 
Ok! I got it so far! (Yes)

Which is the best numerical integration method for this case? (Wondering)
 
mathmari said:
Which is the best numerical integration method for this case?

Looks like a case for the trapezoidal rule. (Thinking)
 

Similar threads

  • · Replies 5 ·
Replies
5
Views
3K
  • · Replies 3 ·
Replies
3
Views
3K
  • · Replies 2 ·
Replies
2
Views
2K
  • · Replies 1 ·
Replies
1
Views
2K
Replies
1
Views
2K
Replies
2
Views
2K
  • · Replies 24 ·
Replies
24
Views
4K
  • · Replies 20 ·
Replies
20
Views
4K
  • · Replies 6 ·
Replies
6
Views
2K
Replies
5
Views
2K