Can High School Calculus Solve This Integration Problem?

  • Thread starter Thread starter NoahCygnus
  • Start date Start date
  • Tags Tags
    Integration
Click For Summary

Homework Help Overview

The discussion revolves around the integral ∫ ln(e^{Φ^2}+1)dΦ, with participants exploring its solvability within the context of high school calculus. The original poster expresses difficulty in solving the integral using methods learned in high school, such as substitution and integration by parts, and questions whether the problem exceeds typical high school calculus capabilities.

Discussion Character

  • Exploratory, Assumption checking, Conceptual clarification

Approaches and Questions Raised

  • Some participants note that even advanced computational tools like Wolfram Alpha and Maple fail to provide an analytical solution, suggesting the integral may be non-elementary. Others discuss the possibility of approximations for large values of Φ and the use of series expansions as alternative approaches.

Discussion Status

The discussion is ongoing, with various interpretations being explored regarding the nature of the integral. Participants have proposed different methods, including series expansions and the use of special functions, while acknowledging the limitations of standard functions in expressing the integral. There is no explicit consensus on a solution, but several productive directions have been suggested.

Contextual Notes

Participants are operating under the assumption that the integral may not be solvable in terms of elementary functions, and there is a recognition of the constraints imposed by high school-level calculus knowledge. The discussion also touches on the validity of approximations and series solutions in the context of the problem.

NoahCygnus
Messages
96
Reaction score
2
Member advised that the homework template must be used
ln(e^{Φ^2}+1)dΦ

I am a high school math student, so my calculus knowledge is that of high school. I tried to solve this problem, but nothing I have learned seemed to work so far, substitution didn't work, integration by parts didn't work. I presume this problem is beyond high school level calculus. I will be satisfied if anyone can solve this problem. And I apologise for the way I presented the problem, I don't know latex.
 
Physics news on Phys.org
Well, even wolfram fails to solve it analytically ( I suppose you already have tried it there). However a good approximation (if ##\phi## takes large enough values) is ##\phi^3/3## because for large ##\phi## we have ##ln(e^{\phi^2}+1)\approx \phi^2##.
 
I typed "integral of ln(e^(phi^2)+1) d phi" into Wolfram Alpha and it appears to interpret it as expected but it says "No result found in terms of standard mathematical functions". So not even Wolfram Alpha can solve that one.
 
NoahCygnus said:
ln(e^{Φ^2}+1)dΦ

I am a high school math student, so my calculus knowledge is that of high school. I tried to solve this problem, but nothing I have learned seemed to work so far, substitution didn't work, integration by parts didn't work. I presume this problem is beyond high school level calculus. I will be satisfied if anyone can solve this problem. And I apologise for the way I presented the problem, I don't know latex.

Maple cannot find a formula for the integral, either. Because Maple and Mathematica (Wolfram Alpha) both fail, I suspect strongly that this integral is one of the "non-elementary" integrals that cannot be expressed as a finite number of terms involving all the standard functions.

There are numerous examples that are provably non-elementary; this means that people have proved that they are impossible in terms of standard functions. It is not just a matter of nobody so far having been smart enough to get the answer; rather, it is the fact that you can prove that a finite answer is absolutely impossible in terms of standard functions.

Your function is not among the standard non-elementary examples, but the fact that powerful computer packages fail on it suggests very strongly that it is not do-able. These packages use powerful advanced methods based on some deep theorems due to Risch and others about possibility/impossibility. They go way beyond anything you will find in introductory calculus textbooks.

Note, however, that various approximation methods exist, including series expansions plus many numerical methods, so getting a numerical answer for ##F(x) = \int_0^x \ln(1 + e^{\phi^2})\,d \phi## for numbers ##x > 0## is not difficult using modern methods.
 
Last edited:
NoahCygnus said:
ln(e^{Φ^2}+1)dΦ

I am a high school math student, so my calculus knowledge is that of high school. I tried to solve this problem, but nothing I have learned seemed to work so far, substitution didn't work, integration by parts didn't work. I presume this problem is beyond high school level calculus. I will be satisfied if anyone can solve this problem. And I apologise for the way I presented the problem, I don't know latex.

Depends on what you mean by "solve". Just because an integral cannot be expressed in terms of simple functions like polynomials or radicals or trig functions doesn't mean it can't be "solved". There are many special functions that represent such integrals. For example:
##\int \frac{\sin(x)}{x}dx=\text{Si}(x)##

And the sine function Si(x) is just a function like ##\sin(x)##. Why then cannot we just say:

##\int \log(e^{x^2}-1)dx=\text{myfunction}(x)##

Also, how about a (convergent) power series solution? Is that not a legitimate solution just like sine or cosine? For example:

##\log(e^{x^2}+1)=\log(2)+\frac{x^2}{2}+\frac{x^4}{8}+\frac{x^8}{192}+\frac{x^{12}}{2280}+\cdots##

then can't we write:

## \int \log(e^{x^2}+1)dx=\int \big[ \log)(2)+\frac{x^2}{2}+\frac{x^4}{8}+\frac{x^8}{192}+\frac{x^{12}}{2280}+\cdots \big]dx##

Can you integrate that power series solution and come out with a closed-form solution like:

##\int \log(e^{x^2}+1)dx=\log(2)x+\sum_{n=1}^{\infty} (\text{some expression here})##?
 
  • Like
Likes   Reactions: Delta2
aheight said:
Depends on what you mean by "solve". Just because an integral cannot be expressed in terms of simple functions like polynomials or radicals or trig functions doesn't mean it can't be "solved". There are many special functions that represent such integrals. For example:
##\int \frac{\sin(x)}{x}dx=\text{Si}(x)##

And the sine function Si(x) is just a function like ##\sin(x)##. Why then cannot we just say:

##\int \log(e^{x^2}-1)dx=\text{myfunction}(x)##

Also, how about a (convergent) power series solution? Is that not a legitimate solution just like sine or cosine? For example:

##\log(e^{x^2}+1)=\log(2)+\frac{x^2}{2}+\frac{x^4}{8}+\frac{x^8}{192}+\frac{x^{12}}{2280}+\cdots##

then can't we write:

## \int \log(e^{x^2}+1)dx=\int \big[ \log)(2)+\frac{x^2}{2}+\frac{x^4}{8}+\frac{x^8}{192}+\frac{x^{12}}{2280}+\cdots \big]dx##

Can you integrate that power series solution and come out with a closed-form solution like:

##\int \log(e^{x^2}+1)dx=\log(2)x+\sum_{n=1}^{\infty} (\text{some expression here})##?

Let
$$F(x) = \int_0^x \ln \left( 1 + e^{\phi^2} \right) \, d\phi .$$
The series solution proposed above will converge only for small values of ##|x|##. A much more effective series solution (involving non-elementary but well-studied and readily-available functions) is obtained by writing
$$ \ln\left(1+e^{\phi^2}\right) = \ln\left( e^{\phi^2} \right) + \ln \left( 1 + e^{-\phi^2} \right) = \phi^2 + \ln \left( 1 + e^{-\phi^2} \right).$$
Thus
$$F(x) = \frac{x^3}{3} + \int_0^x \ln \left( 1 + e^{-\phi^2} \right) \, d\phi.$$
Now expand the second logarithm, using ##\ln(1+u) = u - u^2/2 + u^3/3 - \cdots## with ##u = e^{-\phi^2} < 1## (so: convergent). Note that ##u^n = e^{-n \phi^2}##, so we can express the ##n##th term of the series for ##F(x)## as
$$t_n(x) = \frac{(-1)^{n-1}}{n} \int_0^x e^{-n \phi^2} \, d\phi = \frac{(-1)^{n-1} \sqrt{\pi}}{n^{3/2}} \text{erf}( x \sqrt{n}) .$$
Here, "erf" is the non-elementary function
$$\text{erf}(w) = \frac{2}{\sqrt{\pi}} \int_0^w e^{-t^2} \, dt$$.
The infinite series above converges for all ##x > 0.##
In sophisticated computer packages the function "erf" is built-in, so numerical evaluation of the terms of ##F(x)## is not very difficult. (However, to be fair, I must say that for sizable values of ##x>0## we may need to include a large number of terms in order to obtain good accuracy.)
 
Last edited:
  • Like
Likes   Reactions: aheight and Delta2

Similar threads

  • · Replies 6 ·
Replies
6
Views
2K
Replies
9
Views
3K
Replies
4
Views
2K
  • · Replies 5 ·
Replies
5
Views
2K
  • · Replies 4 ·
Replies
4
Views
2K
Replies
7
Views
2K
  • · Replies 4 ·
Replies
4
Views
2K
  • · Replies 4 ·
Replies
4
Views
2K
  • · Replies 4 ·
Replies
4
Views
1K
  • · Replies 6 ·
Replies
6
Views
4K