How do I evaluate this definite integral in Calc 1?

opticaltempest
Messages
135
Reaction score
0
I am trying to evaluate this integral,

\[<br /> \int_{ - r}^r {\left( {s\sqrt {1 + \frac{{x^2 }}{{r^2 - x^2 }}} } \right)} {\rm }dx\]

Is it a valid integral?

If I evaluate it by plugging in r and -r, it becomes undefined.
How else can I evaluate this integral? I'm in calculus 1 and I am guessing
this may be a topic covered in later calculus classes?EDIT: I had the integral wrong. It should be,

\[<br /> \int_{ - r}^r {\left( {s\sqrt {1 + \frac{{r^2 }}{{r^2 - x^2 }}} } \right)} {\rm }dx\]

Thanks
 
Last edited:
Physics news on Phys.org
The integral is well defined (the singularity you observed is called integrable because it doesn't bother the integral), and you can calculate it really easily. Hint: think about symmetry.

Edit: Haha. Ok Halls, fairly easily. :smile:
 
Last edited:
Well, not all that "really easily". Opticaltempest, have you covered "trigonometric substitutions" yet?
 
I got the original integral wrong. I updated it in an edit. Sorry

I am allowed to use technology right now to evaluate the above integral.

Using Maple 10 I find the above integral evaluates to

\[<br /> - \sqrt r \cdot \sqrt { - r} \cdot s\left( {\ln ( - r) - \ln (r)} \right)<br /> \]

Which simplifies to,

\[<br /> - r \cdot s \cdot i(\pi \cdot i)<br /> \]<br />

Which simplified to,

\[<br /> r \cdot s \cdot \pi <br /> \]<br />This was what I was looking for :) I haven't covered using trigonometric substitution yet.
I was just curious how I would integrate that without using a CAS.
 
The form seems familiar, from what I remember it may have something to do with the arc length derivation.
 
There are two things I don't understand about this problem. First, when finding the nth root of a number, there should in theory be n solutions. However, the formula produces n+1 roots. Here is how. The first root is simply ##\left(r\right)^{\left(\frac{1}{n}\right)}##. Then you multiply this first root by n additional expressions given by the formula, as you go through k=0,1,...n-1. So you end up with n+1 roots, which cannot be correct. Let me illustrate what I mean. For this...
Back
Top