Doubt with proof of integral of odd function

Click For Summary
The discussion centers on the proof of the integral of an odd function, specifically addressing a confusion about variable substitution. The user questions the validity of switching variables back to x in the context of the integral limits and the properties of odd functions. They express uncertainty about the relationship between the integrals after the variable change. The conclusion reached is that the confusion arises from the naming of the variable rather than the mathematical principles involved. Understanding that variable names do not affect the outcome clarifies the doubt presented.
Hernaner28
Messages
261
Reaction score
0
1. The proof
attachment.php?attachmentid=48872&stc=1&d=1341445316.gif
2. The doubt

What I don't understand is when he switch the variable back to x. He says that:
\displaystyle \int_{-a}^{0}{f(x)dx=-\int_{0}^{a}{f(x)dx}}

But if we have:
\displaystyle \int_{0}^{a}{f(-t)dt=-\int_{0}^{a}{f(t)dt}}

Then if we switch back to x we should have:
\displaystyle \int_{-a}^{0}{f(x)dx=\int_{-a}^{0}{f(-x)dx}}

And not what he said. Could you clarify that to me?

Thanks!
 

Attachments

  • oddfunction.gif
    oddfunction.gif
    25.8 KB · Views: 2,443
Physics news on Phys.org
I think I got it. I think is a matter of the name of the variable.
 
Question: A clock's minute hand has length 4 and its hour hand has length 3. What is the distance between the tips at the moment when it is increasing most rapidly?(Putnam Exam Question) Answer: Making assumption that both the hands moves at constant angular velocities, the answer is ## \sqrt{7} .## But don't you think this assumption is somewhat doubtful and wrong?

Similar threads

  • · Replies 13 ·
Replies
13
Views
2K
Replies
6
Views
2K
  • · Replies 23 ·
Replies
23
Views
2K
  • · Replies 14 ·
Replies
14
Views
2K
  • · Replies 14 ·
Replies
14
Views
2K
Replies
9
Views
2K
Replies
12
Views
2K
  • · Replies 6 ·
Replies
6
Views
2K
  • · Replies 9 ·
Replies
9
Views
2K
Replies
2
Views
1K