How can I prove that f(x) is greater than 0 for x≥0?

Click For Summary
To prove that f(x) = (x-0)∫(sin(x)/(x+1))dx is greater than 0 for x≥0, the key approach involves analyzing the behavior of the integral. The suggestion is to identify points where sin(x)/(x+1) changes sign and break the integral into sub-integrals at these points. By combining these sub-integrals, one can demonstrate that their sum remains positive, thus proving the overall function is greater than 0. It's emphasized that an exact solution isn't necessary; rather, a convincing argument that the sum is positive suffices. Understanding the properties of integrals and their bounds is crucial in this analysis.
monsmatglad
Messages
75
Reaction score
0

Homework Statement


Hi. I need help understanding a task where i am supposed to prove that a function must be greater than 0 when x is from 0 and up. f(x) = (x-0)integral of (sinx/(x+1)) please help me out with this.

Mons
 
Physics news on Phys.org
Here is the method with which I imagined doing this. Find when sin(x)/(x+1) changes sign. Break the integral from 0 to x into many sub-integrals, from 0 to first sign change, from first sign change to second sign change, etc. See if you can combine some integrals together to get an equivalent sum of all positive numbers. Ergo, the final integral is positive.

EDIT: I corrected the part in bold above, upon rereading this.
 
Last edited:
Tedjn said:
Here is the method with which I imagined doing this. Find when sin(x)/(x+1) changes sign. Break the integral from 0 to x into many sub-integrals, from 0 to first sign change, from first sign change to second sign change, etc. See if you can combine some integrals together to get an equivalent sum of all positive numbers. Ergo, the final integral is positive.

EDIT: I corrected the part in bold above, upon rereading this.

sorry, but i don't seem to understand.:/ what do you mean with breaking the integral into sub-integrals. could you please give me an example.

Mons
 
Repeatedly apply, if a < c < b,

\int_a^b f(x)dx = \int_a^c f(x)dx + \int_c^b f(x)dx​

I am sorry if I am too vague, but it is a fine line between helping and solving. Apply this equation to what I said above, at the points I said above, and see if inspiration strikes. After expanding, you can try combining integrals together again, but in a different way than the way you broke them up. Note that you can carefully change the bounds on an integral as long as you make the appropriate compensations inside the body of the integral.
 
Tedjn said:
Repeatedly apply, if a < c < b,

\int_a^b f(x)dx = \int_a^c f(x)dx + \int_c^b f(x)dx​

I am sorry if I am too vague, but it is a fine line between helping and solving. Apply this equation to what I said above, at the points I said above, and see if inspiration strikes. After expanding, you can try combining integrals together again, but in a different way than the way you broke them up. Note that you can carefully change the bounds on an integral as long as you make the appropriate compensations inside the body of the integral.

I've been looking at the function and at the x-values for maximum and minimum, but i don't see how to get any information about the function(the integral) except for its derivative. if i split up in sub-intervals i don't understand find anything about the integral since it can't be analytically solved and therefor can't produce any integral values.

Mons
Sorry for bad English.
 
As in most inequalities, you don't need to find an exact solution, only find a way to convincingly show a sum is positive. There may be many ways to do this, but you can try to combine the sub-integrals.
 
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 9 ·
Replies
9
Views
3K
  • · Replies 105 ·
4
Replies
105
Views
6K
  • · Replies 12 ·
Replies
12
Views
3K
  • · Replies 15 ·
Replies
15
Views
2K
  • · Replies 5 ·
Replies
5
Views
2K
  • · Replies 8 ·
Replies
8
Views
1K
  • · Replies 2 ·
Replies
2
Views
2K
  • · Replies 2 ·
Replies
2
Views
2K
  • · Replies 19 ·
Replies
19
Views
2K
  • · Replies 6 ·
Replies
6
Views
1K