[(|f(x)|)^(-1)]*integral(|f(x)|dx) = [(f(x))^(-1)]*integral(f(x)dx)?

  • Thread starter Thread starter coverband
  • Start date Start date
AI Thread Summary
The discussion centers around the equation [(|f(x)|)^(-1)]*integral(|f(x)|dx) = [(f(x))^(-1)]*integral(f(x)dx) and whether it holds true. Participants clarify that the integral's numerator is a number if definite, while it becomes a function if indefinite, complicating the comparison. A counter-example is presented, indicating that the equation does not generally hold true. The conversation also raises questions about the nature of integration—definite versus indefinite—and the implications of constants in antiderivatives. Ultimately, the consensus is that the original statement is incorrect.
coverband
Messages
170
Reaction score
1
I heard [(|f(x)|)^(-1)]*integral(|f(x)|dx) = [(f(x))^(-1)]*integral(f(x)dx)

(i.e. when dividing the integral of the absolute value of a function by the absolute value of the function, the absolute value signs cancel out)

Is this true

If so, how so?
 
Mathematics news on Phys.org
Are these antiderivatives? If so, the presence of unknown constants are going to blow this whole thing out of the water. Regardless, let's pick an example

f(x) = x

\frac{ \int_{-a}^{a}|x|dx }{ |a| } = |a|
\frac{ \int_{-a}^{a} xdx } { a } = 0

Like that?
 
Basically is
(int|x|dx)/(|x|) = (intxdx)/( x )

and if so how?
 
Last edited:
First let's clear up the notation.
The numerator
\int f(x) \, dx
is a number, it does not depend on x. The denominator f(x) does.
Do you then claim that
\frac{ \int |f(y)| \, dy}{|x|} = \frac{\int f(y) \, dy}{x}
for all x?

Secondly, is the integration definite (e.g. implied over the whole domain) or indefinite (i.e. you need an arbitrary integration constant to be added)?

Finally, Office_Shredder has given a counter-example to what was supposedly your statement, so to answer your question: "No, basically it is not".
 
CompuChip said:
First let's clear up the notation.
The numerator
\int f(x) \, dx
is a number, it does not depend on x. The denominator f(x) does.
Do you then claim that
\frac{ \int |f(y)| \, dy}{|x|} = \frac{\int f(y) \, dy}{x}
for all x?

Secondly, is the integration definite (e.g. implied over the whole domain) or indefinite (i.e. you need an arbitrary integration constant to be added)?

Finally, Office_Shredder has given a counter-example to what was supposedly your statement, so to answer your question: "No, basically it is not".


first of all, why should the numerator be a "number" if the integral is indefinite, then it gives a function! only if the num was definite, would it be a number
 
Insights auto threads is broken atm, so I'm manually creating these for new Insight articles. In Dirac’s Principles of Quantum Mechanics published in 1930 he introduced a “convenient notation” he referred to as a “delta function” which he treated as a continuum analog to the discrete Kronecker delta. The Kronecker delta is simply the indexed components of the identity operator in matrix algebra Source: https://www.physicsforums.com/insights/what-exactly-is-diracs-delta-function/ by...
Suppose ,instead of the usual x,y coordinate system with an I basis vector along the x -axis and a corresponding j basis vector along the y-axis we instead have a different pair of basis vectors ,call them e and f along their respective axes. I have seen that this is an important subject in maths My question is what physical applications does such a model apply to? I am asking here because I have devoted quite a lot of time in the past to understanding convectors and the dual...
Back
Top