How am I screwing up these integrals?

  • Thread starter Thread starter Maxwell
  • Start date Start date
  • Tags Tags
    Integrals
Click For Summary

Homework Help Overview

The discussion revolves around evaluating a double integral for the function f(x,y) = 1 - x over a triangular region defined by the vertices (0,0), (1,1), and (-2,1). Participants are examining the setup of the integral and the limits of integration.

Discussion Character

  • Exploratory, Assumption checking, Problem interpretation

Approaches and Questions Raised

  • Participants discuss the setup of the integral and the limits of integration, questioning the correctness of the y-coordinate limits based on the triangular region. There are attempts to clarify the integration process and the terminology used in describing the steps taken.

Discussion Status

Some participants have provided guidance on determining the correct limits for the y integral, suggesting that the lower limit is not universally zero and depends on the x-coordinate. There is acknowledgment of a typo in the limits of integration, and further clarification is sought regarding the equations for the edges of the triangle.

Contextual Notes

Participants are working under the constraints of homework rules, which may limit the information they can share or the methods they can use. The original poster's confusion about the limits of integration is a central point of discussion.

Maxwell
Messages
511
Reaction score
0
How am I screwing up this integral?

[itex]f(x,y) = 1 - x;[/itex]

R is the triangle bounded with vertices (0,0),(1,1),(-2,1)

What I've done:

I drew out the picture, and I set up the following integral:

[itex]\int_{0}^{1}\int_{-2}^{1} (1-x) dx dy[/itex]

Then I solved with respect to x,

I got (after plugging in the boundries):

INT_{0}^{1} [(1 - (1/2)) - (-2 - 2)] dy

Solving this with rt y,

(y/2) + 4y

With boundries applied,

(1/2) + 4

The answer in the book is 2.

What am I doing wrong?
 
Last edited:
Physics news on Phys.org
The limits of integration are wrong.
 
Maxwell said:
[itex]f(x,y) = 1 - x;[/itex]

R is the triangle bounded with vertices (0,0),(1,1),(-2,1)

What I've done:

I drew out the picture, and I set up the following integral:

[itex]\int_{0}^{1}\int_{-2}^{1} (1-x) dx dy[/itex]
Notice that the y coordinate does NOT go from 0 to 1 everywhere inside the triangle! The lower limit of y depends on the position along x at which you are. So you must be careful with the *limits* of your y integral.
Then I solved with respect to x,
Just a comment...Saying "I *solved* with respect to x" is a very unconventional way to say things, it will confuse people a lot. You should say "I integrated x". And instead of saying "I applied the boundaries" it is more standard to say "I evaluated at the limits of integration"

I got (after plugging in the boundries):

INT_{0}^{1} [(1 - (1/2)) - (-2 - 2)] dy

Solving this with rt y,

(y/2) + 4y

With boundries applied,

(1/2) + 4

The answer in the book is 2.

What am I doing wrong?
 
Thanks for the tips.

How do I find the limits of my y integral, then?

I assume the lower limit will be 0.
 
Maxwell said:
Thanks for the tips.

How do I find the limits of my y integral, then?

I assume the lower limit will be 0.

No. Look at your drawing. Do you see that the lower value of y is 0 *only* when x is zero!? when x is not zero, the lower value of y is not zero. Consider separately the "left" and "right" edges of the triangle (the right edge is the line connecting (0,0) to (1,1) for example). For those two edges, you have to work out an equation relating y and x (since these are straight lines, you will obviously have a form y = mx +b). Do this for the left and right edge. Those two equations will become your lower limits for y, depending on whether x is smaller or larger than 1. So you will get something of the form [tex]\int_{-2}^0 dx \int_{mx +b}^1 dy (1-x) + \int_{0}^1 dx \int_{m'x+ b'}^1 dy (1-x)[/tex]

Hope this helps

Patrick
EDIT: one of my limites for x was wrong. I just corrected it
 
Last edited:
Oh, wow, now I see. Thanks a lot, that makes sense.
 
Maxwell said:
Oh, wow, now I see. Thanks a lot, that makes sense.
You are welcome.
(One of my limits on x was wrong, I had made a typo. I just corrected it)

Glad I could help.

Patrick
 

Similar threads

Replies
4
Views
3K
  • · Replies 10 ·
Replies
10
Views
2K
  • · Replies 19 ·
Replies
19
Views
3K
  • · Replies 2 ·
Replies
2
Views
2K
Replies
3
Views
2K
  • · Replies 2 ·
Replies
2
Views
2K
Replies
2
Views
1K
  • · Replies 6 ·
Replies
6
Views
2K
Replies
2
Views
1K
  • · Replies 6 ·
Replies
6
Views
2K