Elementary Integration - First Principles?

Click For Summary
The discussion centers on the quest for a first-principles equation for integration that can be solved similarly to differentiation. The original poster expresses difficulty in understanding integration intuitively and attempts to derive it using Riemann sums but encounters errors in their calculations. Respondents suggest that the computation of Riemann sums and their limits can be complex and recommend exploring specific integrals, such as ∫₀¹ x² dx and ∫₀¹ x³ dx, to uncover patterns and deepen understanding. They emphasize the value of working through these problems by hand to gain insight into the fundamental concepts of integration. Overall, the conversation highlights the importance of foundational knowledge and practical exercises in mastering integration.
SigmaScheme
Messages
4
Reaction score
0
Is there an first-principles equation for integration that can be explicitly solved like that for differentiation? - I'm trying to understand Integration intuitively. Thanks heaps.

I've tried to piece together one but can't quite solve it (for simple functions like f = x). Things cancel and disappear and I get obviously wrong results.\int^{x_{2}}_{x_{1}}F(x)dx=lim_{n\rightarrow\infty}\sum^{n}_{i=0}F(x_{1} + i\Deltax)\Deltax in which \Deltax=\frac{x_{2}-x_{1}}{n}

I want to know how integration was derived and how it works, like I do with differentiation and limits.

Thanks for reading my post.
 
Last edited:
Physics news on Phys.org
SigmaScheme said:
Is there an first-principles equation for integration that can be explicitly solved like that for differentiation? - I'm trying to understand Integration intuitively. Thanks heaps.

I've tried to piece together one but can't quite solve it (for simple functions like f = x). Things cancel and disappear and I get obviously wrong results.


\int^{x_{2}}_{x_{1}}F(x)dx=lim_{n\rightarrow\infty}\sum^{n}_{i=0}F(x_{1} + i\Deltax)\Deltax in which \Deltax=\frac{x_{2}-x_{1}}{n}

I want to know how integration was derived and how it works, like I do with differentiation and limits.

Thanks for reading my post.

Your topic needs too much reading/writing for a response in this forum. I suggest you DO some reading on the subject. There are numerous books available, and lots of material available on-line. One free article that seems to deal exactly with your issues is in http://www.maths.uq.edu.au/~jab/qamttalkmay2002.pdf , which was written for beginning students. Make sure you read the _whole_ thing; don't just look at page 1 and say "that is not what I need".

RGV
 
SigmaScheme said:
Is there an first-principles equation for integration that can be explicitly solved like that for differentiation? - I'm trying to understand Integration intuitively. Thanks heaps.

I've tried to piece together one but can't quite solve it (for simple functions like f = x). Things cancel and disappear and I get obviously wrong results.\int^{x_{2}}_{x_{1}}F(x)dx=lim_{n\rightarrow\infty}\sum^{n}_{i=0}F(x_{1} + i\Deltax)\Deltax in which \Deltax=\frac{x_{2}-x_{1}}{n}

I want to know how integration was derived and how it works, like I do with differentiation and limits.

Thanks for reading my post.

You seem to have seen Riemann sums, but this is the basic theory.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Riemann_integral

The computation of the limit of the Riemann sums is not always straightforward or easy.

It's very instructive to work out the Riemann integral of

\int^{1}_{0}x^2\ dx

from first principles. You'll see when you do it that it's related to a well-known formula from discrete mathematics.

Then try \int^{1}_{0}x^3\ dx

and see how far you can generalize the pattern.

Doing these by hand directly from the definition of the Riemann integral is an extremely edifying and also entertaining exercise. There's actually a mathematical punchline in there ... a little discovery that's the payoff for doing this by hand.
 
Thanks!
 
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
6
Views
2K
  • · Replies 105 ·
4
Replies
105
Views
6K
  • · Replies 12 ·
Replies
12
Views
2K
Replies
10
Views
2K
  • · Replies 7 ·
Replies
7
Views
2K
  • · Replies 15 ·
Replies
15
Views
2K
  • · Replies 5 ·
Replies
5
Views
2K
  • · Replies 21 ·
Replies
21
Views
1K
Replies
17
Views
2K
  • · Replies 3 ·
Replies
3
Views
2K