Find the Mistake in Calculating Volume by Integration

  • Thread starter Thread starter keewansadeq
  • Start date Start date
  • Tags Tags
    Integration Volume
Click For Summary

Homework Help Overview

The discussion revolves around a problem involving the calculation of volume by integration, where the original poster presents their answer and compares it to a book's answer, seeking to identify any mistakes in their calculation.

Discussion Character

  • Assumption checking, Problem interpretation, Mixed

Approaches and Questions Raised

  • Participants examine the original poster's calculations, with some affirming the correctness of the work while others suggest potential typos in the book's answer. There is also a consideration of geometric reasoning as a means to validate the volume calculation.

Discussion Status

The discussion includes various perspectives on the correctness of the original poster's answer compared to the book's answer. Some participants have offered guidance on the potential for a typo in the book, while others have raised concerns about the approximation of π used in the calculations.

Contextual Notes

There is mention of a possible typo in the book's answer, as well as a discussion about the appropriateness of using a crude approximation for π in the calculations. The original poster expresses confusion regarding the volume comparison using geometric reasoning.

keewansadeq
Messages
12
Reaction score
0

Homework Statement


I have the attached problem ,and Show my answer and solution,

My answer is 3.14*(15 -8ln4)
While book answer 3.14(15+8ln)
IMG_2214.jpg

Can anyone point to the mistake I made?
 
Physics news on Phys.org
Your calculation looks correct to me. I don't see any obvious errors.
 
Your work also looks good to me.
The one thing I noticed is the answer from the book would be right if you take the negative away from the 1.

I'm guessing the book has a typo.
 
keewansadeq said:
While book answer 3.14(15+8ln)
If this is actually the book's answer, it makes no sense without something following ln.
 
Thanks
Absolutely right, but draw the function, you will see that volume is almost as his answer(using geometry not integration),and that why I am confused.
 
keewansadeq said:
Thanks
Absolutely right, but draw the function, you will see that volume is almost as his answer(using geometry not integration),and that why I am confused.

If you think that the book's answer ##\pi (15+8 \ln(4))## is close to the correct answer you are very much mistaken. The correct answer is yours, except that the approximation ##\pi = 3.14## is way too crude---just leave it as symbolic ##\pi## until it comes time to evaluate the final answer numerically. Look at the following:
\begin{array}{rccc}<br /> \pi (15 - 8 \ln\,4 )&amp; \doteq &amp; 12.28251236 &amp; \doteq &amp; 12.3 \\<br /> \pi (15 + 8 \ln\,4 ) &amp; \doteq &amp; 81.96526726 &amp; \doteq &amp; 82.0 \\<br /> \pi 15 &amp; \doteq &amp; 47.12388981 &amp; \doteq &amp; 47.1<br /> \end{array}<br /> <br />
 
  • Like
Likes   Reactions: Charles Link
you
Ray Vickson said:
If you think that the book's answer ##\pi (15+8 \ln(4))## is close to the correct answer you are very much mistaken. The correct answer is yours, except that the approximation ##\pi = 3.14## is way too crude---just leave it as symbolic ##\pi## until it comes time to evaluate the final answer numerically. Look at the following:
\begin{array}{rccc}<br /> \pi (15 - 8 \ln\,4 )&amp; \doteq &amp; 12.28251236 &amp; \doteq &amp; 12.3 \\<br /> \pi (15 + 8 \ln\,4 ) &amp; \doteq &amp; 81.96526726 &amp; \doteq &amp; 82.0 \\<br /> \pi 15 &amp; \doteq &amp; 47.12388981 &amp; \doteq &amp; 47.1<br /> \end{array}<br /> <br />
You are right his answer is not logical,

Thanks
 

Similar threads

  • · Replies 16 ·
Replies
16
Views
2K
  • · Replies 8 ·
Replies
8
Views
1K
  • · Replies 9 ·
Replies
9
Views
2K
  • · Replies 6 ·
Replies
6
Views
2K
Replies
4
Views
1K
  • · Replies 16 ·
Replies
16
Views
5K
Replies
28
Views
2K
  • · Replies 2 ·
Replies
2
Views
2K
  • · Replies 5 ·
Replies
5
Views
2K
Replies
1
Views
2K