Confusion over Calculus Book example footnote

In summary, the book is "Calculus" 7th ed, by Robert A. Adams and Christopher Essex. It is about an explained example of the first conclusion of the Fundamental Theorem of Calculus, at Chapter 5.5. I will quote the step I have doubt about:Example 7 Find the derivatives of the following functions:(b) ##G(x)=x^2\,\displaystyle\int_{-4}^{5x}{\,e^{-t^2}\,dt}##Solution By the Product Rule and the Chain Rule,$$G'(x)=(...)$$$$ =2x\displaystyle\int
  • #1
mcastillo356
Gold Member
570
280
Hi,PF

The book is "Calculus" 7th ed, by Robert A. Adams and Christopher Essex. It is about an explained example of the first conclusion of the Fundamental Theorem of Calculus, at Chapter 5.5.

I will only quote the step I have doubt about:

Example 7 Find the derivatives of the following functions:

(b) ##G(x)=x^2\,\displaystyle\int_{-4}^{5x}{\,e^{-t^2}\,dt}##

Solution By the Product Rule and the Chain Rule,

$$G'(x)=(...)$$
$$ =2x\displaystyle\int_{-4}^{5x}{\,e^{-t^2}\,dt}+x^2\;e^{-(5x)^2}\,(5)$$

When I've seen this last written (5), I've thought in first place that I had to move backwards in the textbook. At last, I've understood it referred to the integral upper limit.

Question: I've spent a few hours trying to understand the footnote: the number we must multiply the second summatory by.

Wouldn't it have been easier to just avoid this note and show the result, without that step? Furthermore: isn't this step unclear?.

Greetings!
 
Physics news on Phys.org
  • #2
I have some difficulties understanding your actual question. Do you mean "why has the author put the 5 in paranthesis instead of ##\cdot 5##"?
 
  • Like
  • Informative
Likes mcastillo356 and PeroK
  • #3
mcastillo356 said:
Wouldn't it have been easier to just avoid this note and show the result, without that step? Furthermore: isn't this step unclear?.
Do you mean just write?
$$\dots \ +5x^2e^{-25x^2}$$
 
  • Like
Likes mcastillo356
  • #4
PeroK said:
Do you mean just write?
$$\dots \ +5x^2e^{-25x^2}$$
Yes
 
  • #5
malawi_glenn said:
I have some difficulties understanding your actual question. Do you mean "why has the author put the 5 in paranthesis instead of ##\cdot 5##"?
Yes. It was confusing to me that parenthesis. It made me think it refered to some forgotten content I had to revisit somewhere, some pages back on the textbook. Actually, isn't that "(5)", I mean, the act of writing this kind of note, meant to refer to already read contains?
 
  • #6
Usually it is made clear that you have to refer to a previous equation numbered 5, with something like "by (5)" or a similar phrasing, and it is usually done in the text, not in the middle of the equation (and just dropping a reference to some previous formula in the middle of derivation without any explanatory words wouldn't make much sense anyway). You can see that the author used similar notation in the derivation in the next example:
##\begin{align}
H(x) &= \int_{0}^{x^3}{e^{-t^2}\,dt}-\int_{0}^{x^2}{e^{-t^2}\,dt}\nonumber\\
H'(x) &= e^{-(x^3)^2}(3x^2) - e^{-(x^2)^2}(2x) \nonumber\\
&= 3x^2\,e^{-x^6} - 2x\,e^{-x^4} \nonumber
\end{align}##
 
  • Informative
Likes mcastillo356
  • #7
Thanks, PF! I can understand why did they write the note. I can turn the page.
Regards!
 
  • #8
Dragon27 said:
##\begin{align}
H(x) &= \int_{0}^{x^3}{e^{-t^2}\,dt}-\int_{0}^{x^2}{e^{-t^2}\,dt}\nonumber\\
H'(x) &= e^{-(x^3)^2}(3x^2) - e^{-(x^2)^2}(2x) \nonumber\\
&= 3x^2\,e^{-x^6} - 2x\,e^{-x^4} \nonumber
\end{align}##
Hi, PF, the quoted example builds the Chain Rule into the first conclusion of the Fundamental Theorem:

$$\displaystyle\frac{d}{dx}\displaystyle\int_a^{g(x)}\,f(t)dt=f(g(x))g'(x)$$

The doubt is related, but different at the same time; the Chain Rule itself. I will quote Wikipedia ("Chain Rule" article):

In calculus, the chain rule is a formula that expresses the derivative of the composition of two differentiable functions ##f## and ##g## in terms of the derivatives of ##f## and ##g##. More precisely, if ##h=f\circ{g}## is the function such that ##h(x)=f(g(x))## for every ##x##, then the chain rule is, in Lagrange notation, $$h'(x)=f'(g(x))g'(x)$$.

Well... Just solved the doubt. It is in fact that the number ##e## is the unique positive real number such that ##\displaystyle\frac{d}{dx}\,e^t=e^t##. I mean that I thought that the function ##e^{-t^2}## had not been differentiated. Indeed, of course it is.

Now, the question is: am I on the track?. Is this an inteligible post?

Greetings!
 
  • #9
Well, from the Chain rule:
$$\begin{align}
&h(x)=f(g(x))\nonumber\\
&h'(x)=f'(g(x))g'(x)\nonumber
\end{align}$$
in case of the integral (I've changed the notation to avoid confusion)
$$\displaystyle\frac{d}{dx}\displaystyle\int_a^{g_1(x)}\,f_1(t)dt$$
we have
$$\begin{align}
&g(x)=g_1(x)\nonumber\\
&f(x)=\int_a^{x}\,f_1(t)dt\nonumber
\end{align}$$
so that
$$\begin{align}
&f'(x)=f_1(x)\nonumber\\
&h(x)=f(g(x))=\int_a^{g_1(x)}\,f_1(t)dt\nonumber\\
&h'(x)=f'(g(x))g'(x)=f_1(g_1(x))g_1'(x)\nonumber
\end{align}$$
 
  • Like
  • Informative
Likes vanhees71, mcastillo356 and PeroK
  • #10
Hi, PF, @Dragon27, it's just brilliant, I mean the previous post. It really has captured the doubt, and solved it in a bright mathematical language.

Thanks a lot!
 

Related to Confusion over Calculus Book example footnote

What should I do if the footnote in my calculus book example contradicts the main text?

If you encounter a contradiction between a footnote and the main text, first try to understand the context of both. Often, footnotes provide additional details or special cases. If the contradiction persists, consult other resources or ask your instructor for clarification.

How can I verify the accuracy of a footnote in my calculus book?

To verify the accuracy of a footnote, cross-reference it with other reliable calculus textbooks or academic papers. You can also check online educational resources or forums where experts discuss similar topics. If possible, confirm with your teacher or professor.

Why do calculus books include footnotes in examples?

Footnotes in calculus books are used to provide additional information, clarify assumptions, or highlight exceptions. They help deepen the reader's understanding by offering context or supplementary details that may not fit seamlessly into the main text.

What should I do if I don't understand a footnote in my calculus book?

If a footnote is confusing, try to break it down into smaller parts and understand each component. Look up unfamiliar terms or concepts. If you still struggle, seek assistance from a teacher, tutor, or study group. Online forums and educational websites can also be helpful.

Are footnotes in calculus books essential for understanding the material?

While footnotes are not always essential, they often provide valuable insights and additional context that can enhance your understanding of the material. Ignoring them might lead to missing out on important nuances or deeper explanations.

Similar threads

Replies
14
Views
2K
Replies
2
Views
452
Replies
3
Views
1K
  • STEM Educators and Teaching
Replies
4
Views
2K
Replies
2
Views
1K
  • Set Theory, Logic, Probability, Statistics
Replies
2
Views
340
Replies
1
Views
1K
  • Calculus and Beyond Homework Help
Replies
2
Views
1K
  • Differential Geometry
Replies
2
Views
845
Replies
4
Views
874
Back
Top