Simplifying Integrals with Coefficients

  • Context: Graduate 
  • Thread starter Thread starter MathewsMD
  • Start date Start date
  • Tags Tags
    Coefficients
Click For Summary

Discussion Overview

The discussion revolves around the process of simplifying integrals involving coefficients of polynomial functions, specifically focusing on the properties of orthogonal polynomials and their integrals. Participants explore methods to isolate coefficients in a series expansion of a function expressed in terms of these polynomials, while addressing various mathematical manipulations and properties of integrals.

Discussion Character

  • Technical explanation
  • Mathematical reasoning
  • Debate/contested

Main Points Raised

  • One participant questions how to utilize the property that the integral of two different orthogonal polynomials is zero, specifically ## \int_{-1}^1 P_n P_m \;dx = 0 ## for ## n \neq m ##, in solving a given problem.
  • Another participant suggests finding the kth coefficient in a polynomial series expansion by exploiting the orthogonality property of the polynomials.
  • There is a discussion about the implications of multiplying a function by a polynomial and integrating, with participants seeking clarity on the validity of moving sums outside of integrals.
  • Some participants express uncertainty about how to isolate specific coefficients from the sums involved in the integrals.
  • Participants clarify that when evaluating integrals involving sums of polynomials, the coefficients can be treated as constants during integration.
  • There is a back-and-forth regarding the correct interpretation of terms when the indices of the polynomials are equal, leading to confusion about the treatment of terms where ## n \neq k ##.

Areas of Agreement / Disagreement

Participants do not reach a consensus on the best approach to isolate coefficients or the implications of certain manipulations involving integrals and sums. There are multiple competing views on how to handle the mathematical operations involved.

Contextual Notes

Participants express uncertainty regarding the conditions under which certain mathematical operations are valid, particularly in relation to the treatment of sums and integrals. There are unresolved questions about the implications of orthogonality in the context of the problem being discussed.

MathewsMD
Messages
430
Reaction score
7
For the question attached in the file, how exactly does one go about finding a solution? Problem 28 says that if n does not equal m, then ## \int_{-1} ^{1} {P_n}{P_m} = 0 ##

With that statement, I've tried treating this as a Taylor series (centred at 0, arbitrarily) and then trying to find a general term that would allow me to isolate for ## a_k ## but that was unsuccessful.

Since ## P_k (x) ## and ## f(x) ## have similar orders, can I assume ## \int_{-1} ^{1} {P_k (x)}{f(x)} = 0 ##? This doesn't really help, unless I want the trivial solution for ## a_k = 0##

I also tried substituting the ##a_k## term into the sum to show the two sides are equivalent, but end up with ## f(x) = \sum [{P_k} \int_{-1} ^{1}f(x){P_k}(x)]## but I can't quite do anything with this either.
I just don't quite see how the above statement from Problem 28 is useful in this problem, and am uncertain on how to proceed. Any hints or explanations would be greatly appreciated!
 

Attachments

  • Screen Shot 2014-11-07 at 11.03.49 PM.png
    Screen Shot 2014-11-07 at 11.03.49 PM.png
    5.4 KB · Views: 534
Last edited:
Physics news on Phys.org
It may be easier to see if I adjust the notation a tad:
You have (1) ##f(x)=\sum_{n=0}^N a_nP_n(x)##, and (2) ##\int_{-1}^1 P_nP_m\;dx = 0:n\neq m## (wat happens for n=m?)
Your task is to find the kth coefficient in (1) exploiting the property in (2). (Do you know anything else about P?)
Note: ##\int_{-1}^1 P_k(x)f(x)\;dx \neq 0##
 
Simon Bridge said:
It may be easier to see if I adjust the notation a tad:
You have (1) ##f(x)=\sum_{n=0}^N a_nP_n(x)##, and (2) ##\int_{-1}^1 P_nP_m\;dx = 0:n\neq m## (wat happens for n=m?)
Your task is to find the kth coefficient in (1) exploiting the property in (2). (Do you know anything else about P?)
Note: ##\int_{-1}^1 P_k(x)f(x)\;dx \neq 0##

Do you have any relatively simple proofs for when m = n? I have searched a few and couldn't quite get one with the similar strategy used for ## m \neq n## and the ones for when m = n seem a little longer than what I was expecting.

Also, if I just multiply by ## P_n (x) ##, can I just integrate both sides then and then include ## P_n (x) ## with the sum terms? Then, uses the the property of it equaling for 2/(2n+1) for m = n, this does seem to make sense.
 
Simon Bridge said:
It may be easier to see if I adjust the notation a tad:
You have (1) ##f(x)=\sum_{n=0}^N a_nP_n(x)##, and (2) ##\int_{-1}^1 P_nP_m\;dx = 0:n\neq m## (wat happens for n=m?)
Your task is to find the kth coefficient in (1) exploiting the property in (2). (Do you know anything else about P?)
Note: ##\int_{-1}^1 P_k(x)f(x)\;dx \neq 0##

How exactly does multiplying a sum by a function, and then integrating, work? When you multiply 2 functions, and then integrate, is this analogous to taking the sum of the the two products? If one of the functions is a sum itself, can the initial sum of terms be taken out (e.g. ## f(x)=\sum_{n=0}^N a_nP_n(x) ## and ## g(x) = h(x)f(x)## ; ##\int_{-1}^1 g(x) = h(x)f(x) = \sum_{k=0}^K h(x)a_nP_n(x) ## OR is it ## \int_{-1}^1 g(x) = h(x)f(x) = \sum_{k=0}^K h(x)\sum_{n=0}^Na_nP_n(x) = \sum_{k=0}^K \sum_{n=0}^N h(x)a_nP_n(x) ##
OR none of the above)?

I'm trying to manipulate the equation, but am a little uncertain on the valid operations regarding sum and integral combinations.
 
How exactly does multiplying a sum by a function, and then integrating, work?
Well is ##f=2x^2## and ##g=3x^3## then ## h=fg=6x^5## and ##\int h\;dx = \int fg\;dx = x^6+c##... that's how it works.
You don't need analogies - just do it: concentrate on what is in front of you.

Note: if ##f = \sum_n g_n## then ##\int f\;dx = \int \sum g_n\;dx = \sum \int g_n\;dx##

It's more difficult to help you if you don't answer questions.
 
Simon Bridge said:
Well is ##f=2x^2## and ##g=3x^3## then ## h=fg=6x^5## and ##\int h\;dx = \int fg\;dx = x^6+c##... that's how it works.
You don't need analogies - just do it: concentrate on what is in front of you.

Note: if ##f = \sum_n g_n## then ##\int f\;dx = \int \sum g_n\;dx = \sum \int g_n\;dx##

It's more difficult to help you if you don't answer questions.

Ok, thank you for the feedback! I did this:

Multiply both sides by ## P_n (x) ## to get:

## P_n (x) f(x)= P_n (x) \sum_{n=0}^N a_nP_n(x)## Then I integrated both sides wrt x, from -1 to 1.

## \int _{-1} ^1 P_n (x) f(x)= \int _{-1} ^1 P_n (x) dx \sum_{n=0}^N a_nP_n(x)##

## \int _{-1} ^1 P_n (x) f(x)= \sum_{n=0}^N a_n \int _{-1} ^1 P_n (x)P_n(x) dx ##

## \int _{-1} ^1 P_n (x) f(x)= \sum_{n=0}^N [\frac {2}{2n+1}a_n]##

But I want to find value for the general ##a_n## term, not for the sum of n terms of a up to n. How exactly do I cancel out the sum to find the general term? Have I done anything incorrect so far?
 
You want:
$$\int_{-1}^1 P_k(x)f(x)\;dx = \sum_{n=0}^N a_n \int_{-1}^1 P_k(x)P_n(x)\;dx$$ ... which is why I asked about what happens when n=k.
 
Simon Bridge said:
You want:
$$\int_{-1}^1 P_k(x)f(x)\;dx = \sum_{n=0}^N a_n \int_{-1}^1 P_k(x)P_n(x)\;dx$$ ... which is why I asked about what happens when n=k.

Hmmm..okay. I know that ## \int_{-1}^1 P_k(x)P_n(x)dx = \frac {2}{2n+1}## for ## k = n ##, but from here (I may just be missing something extremely obvious) I am a little lost. I can't seem to separate the ## \sum_{n=0}^N \frac {2}{2n+1}a_n ## and isolate for simply ##a_n## in ##\int_{-1}^1 P_k(x)f(x)\;dx = \sum_{n=0}^N \frac {2}{2n+1}a_n## . I just don't quite see how to break up the series and find the general expression for an arbitrary a term. Any hints?
 
I know that ##\int_{-1}^1 P_kP_n\;dx = \frac{2}{2n+1}## for k=n ...
... you've got it back to front.
In the equation it is n that varies and k that is fixed. What happens when n=k in the sum?

$$\int_{-1}^1 P_kf(x)\;dx \neq \sum_{n=0}^N \frac{2}{2n+1}a_n$$ ... the step right before that one was wrong.

Go back to the last equation I posted and get rid of the summation symbol on the RHS by expanding it explicitly into each term.
What happens to all the terms where ##n\neq k##?
 
  • #10
Simon Bridge said:
... you've got it back to front.
In the equation it is n that varies and k that is fixed. What happens when n=k in the sum?

$$\int_{-1}^1 P_kf(x)\;dx \neq \sum_{n=0}^N \frac{2}{2n+1}a_n$$ ... the step right before that one was wrong.

Go back to the last equation I posted and get rid of the summation symbol on the RHS by expanding it explicitly into each term.
What happens to all the terms where ##n\neq k##?

Ahh yes, sorry. I had just mixed up my notation.
 
  • #11
Simon Bridge said:
... you've got it back to front.
In the equation it is n that varies and k that is fixed. What happens when n=k in the sum?

$$\int_{-1}^1 P_kf(x)\;dx \neq \sum_{n=0}^N \frac{2}{2n+1}a_n$$ ... the step right before that one was wrong.

Go back to the last equation I posted and get rid of the summation symbol on the RHS by expanding it explicitly into each term.
What happens to all the terms where ##n\neq k##?

Would the correct steps be:

## \int _{-1} ^1 P_k (x) f(x)= \sum_{n=0}^N a_n \int _{-1} ^1 P_n (x)P_k(x) dx ##

Then for k = n

## \int _{-1} ^1 P_k (x) f(x)= a_k \frac{2}{2k+1} ## which is the answer since the integral terms become 0 when ## m \neq n ##. Thank you so much for the help!
 
  • #12
No, we do not need to consider that for ##n\neq k## that ##a_n=0## ... why would you need to?
Anyway - that would invalidate the proof.

By picking the value of k, you are choosing to evaluate the coefficient of a single term in the sum.
The point of premultiplying by ##P_k## was to isolate that term.
 
Last edited:
  • #13
Simon Bridge said:
No, we do not need to consider that for ##n\neq k## that ##a_n=0## ... why would you need to?
Anyway - that would invalidate the proof.

Yes. Sorry, I saw what you were saying now. Thank you! I just want to clarify one step still, since I don't quite grasp how exactly integrals and sums are still combined.

For this step:

## \int _{-1} ^1 P_k (x) f(x)\ dx= \int _{-1} ^1 P_k (x) \sum_{n=0}^N a_nP_n(x)\ dx##

to

## \int _{-1} ^1 P_k (x) f(x)\ dx= \sum_{n=0}^N a_n \int _{-1} ^1 P_k (x)P_n(x)\ dx ##

How exactly is it allowed for me to push the integral in the sum? Is it because the ##a_n## terms are considered constant by integration wrt to x, and the ##P_k (x)## function is independent of n? Is what I did here valid?
 

Similar threads

  • · Replies 1 ·
Replies
1
Views
3K
  • · Replies 5 ·
Replies
5
Views
2K
  • · Replies 1 ·
Replies
1
Views
865
  • · Replies 2 ·
Replies
2
Views
2K
  • · Replies 1 ·
Replies
1
Views
4K
  • · Replies 4 ·
Replies
4
Views
3K
  • · Replies 7 ·
Replies
7
Views
3K
  • · Replies 35 ·
2
Replies
35
Views
6K
  • · Replies 9 ·
Replies
9
Views
3K
  • · Replies 4 ·
Replies
4
Views
3K