Calculating Area of f(x) from 0 to 3 with 6 Rectangles

  • Thread starter Thread starter Miike012
  • Start date Start date
  • Tags Tags
    Area
Click For Summary

Homework Help Overview

The discussion revolves around estimating the area under the curve of the function f(x) = 1 + (x - 1)^2 from x = 0 to x = 3 using the method of Riemann sums with 6 rectangles and right endpoints.

Discussion Character

  • Exploratory, Mathematical reasoning, Problem interpretation

Approaches and Questions Raised

  • Participants discuss the use of sigma notation to represent the sum of the areas of rectangles and consider alternative methods for calculating the area. There is also a focus on the accuracy of the final area estimate.

Discussion Status

Some participants have provided guidance on the approach to take, while others have pointed out discrepancies in the final area calculation. Multiple interpretations of the problem-solving method are being explored, but there is no explicit consensus on the correct final value.

Contextual Notes

Participants are operating under the constraints of a homework assignment, which may influence their approaches and the level of detail they provide in their calculations.

Miike012
Messages
1,009
Reaction score
0
I just read the section so I want to make sure I am doing it correctly..
I am using it to assist in solving an area question...

Question:
Estimate the area under the graph of f(x) = 1 + (x - 1)^2 from x = 0 to x = 3 using 6 rectangles and right end point.

Each rectangle has a base of 0.5 wide

1. Ʃ 1 + (0.5*i - 1)^2 = i^2/4 - i + 2 ; i = 0 and n = 6

2. Breaking them up:

1/4Ʃ i^2 - Ʃ i + Ʃ 2 ; i = 0 and n = 6

3. Calculating the area of f by computing the sum of the areas of each rectangle in
[0 , 3]

.5( 1/4*(6*13*7)/(6) - (6*7)/2 + 6*2) = 6.85
 

Attachments

  • sig.png
    sig.png
    5.5 KB · Views: 512
Physics news on Phys.org
You could just do it by adding up the six rectangles and skip the sigma notation altogether. That would probably be simpler. But I think you got it right. Except for the final 6.85 number. That's a little off.
 
I know I could have I just wanted to practice lol..


.
 
Miike012 said:
I know I could have I just wanted to practice lol..


.

That's fine. But there an exact value for the sum. And it isn't 6.85.
 
6.875
 

Similar threads

  • · Replies 2 ·
Replies
2
Views
2K
  • · Replies 11 ·
Replies
11
Views
2K
  • · Replies 6 ·
Replies
6
Views
3K
  • · Replies 14 ·
Replies
14
Views
2K
Replies
1
Views
2K
  • · Replies 3 ·
Replies
3
Views
2K
  • · Replies 12 ·
Replies
12
Views
2K
  • · Replies 6 ·
Replies
6
Views
2K
  • · Replies 4 ·
Replies
4
Views
3K
  • · Replies 2 ·
Replies
2
Views
2K