Describe the solid generated by the integral

  • Thread starter Thread starter Manni
  • Start date Start date
  • Tags Tags
    Integral Solid
Click For Summary

Homework Help Overview

The discussion revolves around describing the solid generated by the integral 2∏∫ x/(1+x²)dx over the interval [0,2]. Participants are exploring the implications of the integral in the context of solids of revolution, particularly focusing on the methods of disks and shells.

Discussion Character

  • Exploratory, Assumption checking, Mixed

Approaches and Questions Raised

  • Participants discuss the interpretation of the integral, questioning whether it is meant to calculate volume or simply describe the solid. There are mentions of using substitution and different methods for calculating volumes of solids of revolution.

Discussion Status

The conversation is active, with various interpretations being explored. Some participants suggest that the question is ambiguous, while others provide different perspectives on how to approach the problem. There is recognition that multiple solids could correspond to the integral, indicating a productive exploration of the topic.

Contextual Notes

Participants note the ambiguity in the phrasing of the question, particularly regarding the term "the solid" versus "a solid." This has led to discussions about different methods of rotation and the potential for multiple valid interpretations of the integral.

Manni
Messages
42
Reaction score
0
I've been told this is a trick question, but I don't understand why:

How would I describe the solid generated by 2∏∫ x/(1+x2)dx on [0,2]

How I would do it I would rewrite the intergal as 2∏∫ x * 1/(1+x2)dx and apply substitution.

I would then use the volume of disks method and integrate the integral about the new bounds. Is this the right way to go about it?
 
Last edited:
Physics news on Phys.org
Manni said:
I've been told this is a trick question, but I don't understand why:

How would I describe the solid generated by 2∏∫ x/(1+x2)dx on [0,2]

How I would do it I would rewrite the intergal as 2∏∫ x * 1/(1+x2)dx and apply substitution.

I would then use the volume of disks method and integrate the integral about the new bounds. Is this the right way to go about it?

Your title line says "describe the solid" generated by the integral, it doesn't say to calculate its volume. Which do you really intend to do? The integral itself calculates the volume under a certain curve which is revolved about the y-axis using the shell, not the disk, method. And a u-substitution would be appropriate, if the problem is to calculate the volume.
 
Consider the formula for a solid of revolution involving rotating the function f(x) around the x-axis. That formula is:

[tex]V=\int_a^b \pi \left(f(x)\right)^2 dx[/tex]

Now, how could you re-write your integral in that form to represent a solid of revolution?
 
I wouldn't call it so much a "trick" question as an ambiguous one.

Firstly, the question doesn't appear to be asking you to actually evaluate the integral, but merely to describe the solid for which the volume calculation would generate this integral.

The ambiguous part is "the solid". If the question were to ask for "a solid" then I'd consider it a legitimate question.

Even if we restrict ourselves to volumes of rotation then I can think of at least two different solids that could lead to that integral. Perhaps you could find them both as an exercise.

That is, find:

1. A volume of rotation around the "y" axis, calculated using the method of shells.

2. A volume of rotation around the "x" axis, calculated using the method of discs.

Edit: I posted the above before seeing either of the two previous replies (due to slow typing and distractions :smile:). I agree however with both of the above replies. The form on the integral expression lends itself most naturally to a method of shells rotation (because of the [itex]2 \pi[/itex] out front) as LCKurtz noted. There is however no real reason why we couldn't include a [itex]\sqrt{2}[/itex] in the function being evaluated by the disc method as per jackmels approach, resulting in the same given integral. This is why I call it an ambiguous question that could have been better worded.
 
Last edited:
Manni said:
I've been told this is a trick question, but I don't understand why:

How would I describe the solid generated by 2∏∫ x/(1+x2)dx on [0,2]

How I would do it I would rewrite the integral as 2∏∫ x * 1/(1+x2)dx and apply substitution.

I would then use the volume of disks method and integrate the integral about the new bounds. Is this the right way to go about it?
It's not all that clear as to what question you're asking.

Are we viewing the integral [itex]\displaystyle 2\pi\int_{0}^{2}\frac{x}{1+x^2}\,dx[/itex] as giving the volume of a solid formed by rotating the area bounded by some function and the coordinate axes about the y-axis?

What is it that you are supposed to say about this integral or do with this integral?
 
Manni said:
I've been told this is a trick question, but I don't understand why:

How would I describe the solid generated by 2∏∫ x/(1+x2)dx on [0,2]

I don't feel it's a trick question at all. I'm getting an A on this one I'm sure:

[tex]2\pi \int_0^2 \frac{x}{1+x^2}dx=\int_0^2 \pi \left(\sqrt{\frac{2x}{1+x^2}}\right)^2dx[/tex]

and so the solid is that rotated around the x-axis. Now put mine on top of the stack when you hand them out to class.

Of course I'm not a HH soooooo, watch it.
 
jackmell said:
I don't feel it's a trick question at all. I'm getting an A on this one I'm sure:
As I said above, that's one possible "answer". There's also a different function for which using the method of shells and rotation about the "y" gives the same integral.

What about this one. The volume below the function [itex]f(x,y) = \frac{x}{x^2+1}[/itex], and above the rectangle in the x,y plane given by [itex]0 \leq x \leq 2[/itex] and [itex]0 \leq y \leq 2 \pi[/itex].
 
Last edited:
LCKurtz, that's exactly what I was looking for. I apologise to the others if I the question was too ambiguous, the textbook just worded it this way.

Nevertheless, thanks everyone!
 
Manni said:
LCKurtz, that's exactly what I was looking for. I apologise to the others if I the question was too ambiguous, the textbook just worded it this way.

Nevertheless, thanks everyone!

You do understand, don't you, the point the others are making? My answer is the one that "leaps out at you" given the way the integral was written. But the truth is that just knowing the integral is insufficient to give a unique answer to the question. It is a bit like questions you see on aptitude tests like what is the next term in 1,3,5,7,9,11,? Everyone "knows" the answer is 13 but there is actually no objective reason to assume that. Similarly, as we have seen, there is more than one correct answer to your question. If this is a problem you are going to hand in, it might be interesting to give Jackmell's example of a solid rotated about the x-axis if you are up for a possible discussion with the teacher. :rolleyes:
 

Similar threads

Replies
3
Views
2K
  • · Replies 12 ·
Replies
12
Views
2K
  • · Replies 1 ·
Replies
1
Views
2K
Replies
1
Views
2K
Replies
2
Views
2K
Replies
3
Views
2K
  • · Replies 10 ·
Replies
10
Views
2K
  • · Replies 5 ·
Replies
5
Views
2K
  • · Replies 11 ·
Replies
11
Views
2K
Replies
3
Views
2K