Correcting an Integral Calculation Using Integration by Parts

  • Context: Undergrad 
  • Thread starter Thread starter Boomer
  • Start date Start date
  • Tags Tags
    Integral Trig
Click For Summary

Discussion Overview

The discussion revolves around the calculation of an integral using integration by parts, specifically for the function F(time) = (Wavelength/4) x cos(2 x pi x frequency x time). Participants are examining the correctness of the integral derived and exploring potential discrepancies in numerical comparisons made using a spreadsheet.

Discussion Character

  • Technical explanation
  • Debate/contested
  • Mathematical reasoning

Main Points Raised

  • One participant presents an integral derived from the function F(time) and expresses concern about its correctness based on numerical comparisons.
  • Another participant asserts that the integration is mathematically correct and suggests that the issue may lie in the averaging procedure used in the spreadsheet.
  • A third participant clarifies the correct form of the integral and highlights a discrepancy in the original participant's expression.
  • A later reply questions the method of calculating differences between areas and suggests that if the differences are consistent, it could confirm both the data and the integration constant.

Areas of Agreement / Disagreement

Participants do not reach a consensus on the correctness of the integral calculation. There are competing views regarding the validity of the original integral and the methods used for verification.

Contextual Notes

There are unresolved aspects regarding the averaging procedure and the treatment of the integration constant, which may affect the comparison of areas under the curve.

Boomer
Messages
1
Reaction score
0
Hello all - first time posting to this forum and glad to find this place. Not really sure how to make the mathematical script appear so apologies for using regular txt.

I've been trying to find the correct integral to the following equation.

F(time) = (Wavelength/4) x cos (2 x pi x frequency x time)

The integral I've come up with using the "integration by parts" rule follows:

Integral F(t) = wavelength x sin(2 x pi x frequency x time) + C
------------------------------------------
8 x pi x frequency

To check the calculations, I put together a spread sheet using averages for the y value to measure areas under the curve in the first equation vs plugging in values for the second. The differences are on the order of 3 magnitude leading me to believe the calculation of the integral is not correct. (The formatting doesn't come out correct in the post. The denominator is supposed to diving in the wavelength -> time numerator portion of the equation.)

Can anyone point out where I made a mistake? Thanks in advance.
 
Physics news on Phys.org
Welcome to PF Boomer.
I don't quite follow what you tried to do with a spreadsheet, but I can tell you that the integration is mathematically correct (as you can check by differentiating). Maybe your "averaging" procedure doesn't work as well as you think?
 
[tex]\int \mathrm{dt} \, \mathrm{fkt}(t) = \int \mathrm{dt} \, \frac{\lambda}{4} \cos \left( 2\pi f t \right) = \frac{\lambda}{8 \pi f} \sin \left( 2\pi f t \right) + C \neq \lambda \sin \left( 2\pi f t \right) + C[/tex]
 
When you "plug in values" for the integral, are you taking differences (i.e. definite integrals intF(t2)-intF(t1))? Or have you calculated the constant based on initial conditions? If the differences of the areas you calculated from the areas and the integral all differ by +/- a constant, then you not only obtain confirmation of your data and calculation, but the integration constant for your integral.
 

Similar threads

  • · Replies 8 ·
Replies
8
Views
4K
  • · Replies 2 ·
Replies
2
Views
3K
  • · Replies 31 ·
2
Replies
31
Views
5K
  • · Replies 27 ·
Replies
27
Views
3K
  • · Replies 4 ·
Replies
4
Views
2K
  • · Replies 5 ·
Replies
5
Views
4K
  • · Replies 3 ·
Replies
3
Views
3K
  • · Replies 5 ·
Replies
5
Views
3K
  • · Replies 2 ·
Replies
2
Views
3K
  • · Replies 3 ·
Replies
3
Views
2K