Can't Get Integral To Come Out Right

  • Thread starter Thread starter Meadman23
  • Start date Start date
  • Tags Tags
    Integral
Click For Summary

Homework Help Overview

The discussion revolves around the integral ∫r^3/(r^2 + h^2)^(3/2), which falls under the subject area of calculus, specifically integration techniques. Participants are exploring different methods to evaluate this integral and are encountering discrepancies in their results.

Discussion Character

  • Exploratory, Mathematical reasoning, Assumption checking

Approaches and Questions Raised

  • Participants discuss using integration by parts and u-substitution, with mixed results. Some express confusion over why integration by parts yields different results compared to other methods. Others suggest breaking the integrand into simpler fractions and question the treatment of h^2 as a constant.

Discussion Status

The discussion is active, with participants offering alternative approaches and questioning assumptions about the variables involved. There is no explicit consensus on the best method yet, but several productive lines of reasoning are being explored.

Contextual Notes

Participants are grappling with the implications of treating h^2 as a constant and the relationships between the variables r and h. There is also mention of specific examples and comparisons to previous problems, indicating a reliance on established methods.

Meadman23
Messages
43
Reaction score
0

Homework Statement



What is ∫r^3/(r^2 + h^2) ^ (3/2)

Homework Equations



uv - ∫v du

The Attempt at a Solution



Using Maxima gives me (r^2 + 2h^2) / sqrt(r^2 + h^2), but when I solve it using integration by parts, I get (3r^2 + 4h^2) / sqrt (r^2 + h^2).

I do:

dv = r(r^2 + h^2) ^ (-3/2)
v = -1/sqrt(r^2 + h^2)

u = r^2
du = 2r dr

Then I plug it into the int. by parts formula.

uv - ∫v du = -r^2/ sqrt (r^2 + h^2) - ∫ - 2r dr / (r^2 + h^2)

And then I integrate once more and I'm left with:

-r^2 / sqrt (r^2 + h^2) + 4*sqrt (r^2 + h^2)

I know that this should work out almost exactly like example 7 from this page, but it just won't. What's going on??
 
Physics news on Phys.org
Try a straight u substitution instead of parts. Write your numerator as ##r^2\cdot r\, dr## and let ##u=r^2+h^2##.
 
Doesn't seem to work.

Letting u = r ^2 + h^2 takes care of r dr but not r^2.

I even tried setting r^2 = u - h^2 , but that doesn't get me anywhere either.
 
Meadman23 said:
...

I even tried setting r2 = u - h2 , but that doesn't get me anywhere either.
That should (and does) work !

Break the integrand into the sum/difference of two fractions.
 
Meadman23 said:
Doesn't seem to work.

Letting u = r ^2 + h^2 takes care of r dr but not r^2.

Sure it does. Put ##u - h^2## in for that ##r^2##.
 
Okay, thanks guys. I split the fraction up into two.

∫u/(2*u^(3/2)) - ∫h^2/(2*u^(3/2)

I wasn't able to get it to come out right until I considered the h^2 as a constant and factored it out along with the 1/2.

1/2∫u/(u^(3/2)) - h^2/2 ∫1/(2*u^(3/2)

Why can I consider h^2 as a constant here? Also, why did integration by parts provide the wrong answer for me??
 
Meadman23 said:
Okay, thanks guys. I split the fraction up into two.

∫u/(2*u^(3/2)) - ∫h^2/(2*u^(3/2)

I wasn't able to get it to come out right until I considered the h^2 as a constant and factored it out along with the 1/2.

1/2∫u/(u^(3/2)) - h^2/2 ∫1/(2*u^(3/2)

Why can I consider h^2 as a constant here? Also, why did integration by parts provide the wrong answer for me??

Well, h is not a function of r, is it ?
 
I mean, h^2 = u - r^2 which means to me that the value of h^2 is dependent on the value of r. How could it not be?
 
Meadman23 said:
I mean, h^2 = u - r^2 which means to me that the value of h^2 is dependent on the value of r. How could it not be?

No you're confusing yourself. u and r^2 are both functions of r, but their difference is not.

Consider this trivial example. Let y= 1 - x^2. Now y is a function of x, obviously. But x^2 is also a function of x.

So if we rearrange this to get 1 = y - x^2, does this mean that "1" is a function of x? No, certainly not.
 
Last edited:
  • #10
I might be reaching here but let's see.

I have:

u = h^2 + r^2

and

r^2

u - r^2 = (h^2 + r^2) - r^2 = h^2

Thus, r^2 vanishes and h^2 is no longer of a function of r. Thus, I can factor it out of my integral.

Am I seeing this right?
 
  • #11
Hmm, let r = h \sinh t as a change of variable.
 

Similar threads

  • · Replies 9 ·
Replies
9
Views
2K
  • · Replies 16 ·
Replies
16
Views
5K
  • · Replies 10 ·
Replies
10
Views
2K
  • · Replies 3 ·
Replies
3
Views
1K
  • · Replies 19 ·
Replies
19
Views
3K
  • · Replies 24 ·
Replies
24
Views
2K
  • · Replies 21 ·
Replies
21
Views
2K
  • · Replies 4 ·
Replies
4
Views
1K
  • · Replies 2 ·
Replies
2
Views
2K
Replies
9
Views
5K