How Do You Solve These Challenging Integration Problems?

  • Thread starter Thread starter armolinasf
  • Start date Start date
  • Tags Tags
    Integration
Click For Summary
SUMMARY

This discussion focuses on solving two integration problems involving definite integrals and a differential equation related to velocity and height under wind resistance. The first problem requires calculating integrals based on the known value of \(\int^{2}_{0}f(t)dt=3\), with specific substitutions suggested for each integral. The second problem involves deriving the height function \(h(t)\) from the velocity equation \(v=(mg/k)(1-e^{(-kt)/m})\), with emphasis on correctly incorporating the initial height \(h_0\) into the solution.

PREREQUISITES
  • Understanding of definite integrals and substitution methods
  • Familiarity with differential equations and their applications
  • Knowledge of exponential functions and their properties
  • Basic concepts of physics related to motion and forces, specifically wind resistance
NEXT STEPS
  • Learn substitution techniques for definite integrals in calculus
  • Study the method of solving first-order differential equations
  • Explore the relationship between velocity and height in physics
  • Investigate the implications of initial conditions in differential equations
USEFUL FOR

Students studying calculus and physics, particularly those tackling integration problems and differential equations related to motion and forces.

armolinasf
Messages
195
Reaction score
0

Homework Statement



I'm having a bit of difficulty with these two integration problems:

1. Suppose [tex]\int^{2}_{0}[/tex]f(t)dt=3 calculate the following:

a) [tex]\int^{.5}_{0}[/tex]f(2t)dt

b) [tex]\int^{1}_{0}[/tex]f(1-t)dt

c) [tex]\int^{1.5}_{1}[/tex]f(3-2t)dt

The second problem is this:

If we assume that wind resistance is proportional to velocity, then the downward velocity, v, of a body of mass m falling vertically is given by:

v=(mg/k)(1-e[tex]^{(-kt)/m}[/tex])

where g is the acceleration due to gravity and k is a constant. Find the height, h, above the surface of the Earth as a dunction of time. Assume the body starts at height h[tex]_{0}[/tex]



The Attempt at a Solution



For 1, I know that there is some sort of substitution that I'm just not seeing.

For 2, I basically treated it like a differential equation where v=dh/dt and I get as an antiderivative: (mg/k)(t-(m/k)e[tex]^{(k/m)t}[/tex]

I'm not sure how to get the height equal to 0 so that I can incorporate the h[tex]_{0}[/tex]

Any help is appreciated
 
Physics news on Phys.org
Point 1. In your hypothesis, make a change of variable: t=2p. What do you get ?

Point 2. You may want to revise your integration. One of the signs is wrong.
 
armolinasf said:

Homework Statement



I'm having a bit of difficulty with these two integration problems:

1. Suppose [tex]\int^{2}_{0}[/tex]f(t)dt=3 calculate the following:
Are you sure this is correct? With this information, you can't come to any conclusion about the following integrals. If it were
[tex]\int_0^1 f(t)dt= 3[/tex]
then they are easy.

a) [tex]\int^{.5}_{0}[/tex]f(2t)dt

b) [tex]\int^{1}_{0}[/tex]f(1-t)dt

c) [tex]\int^{1.5}_{1}[/tex]f(3-2t)dt

The second problem is this:

If we assume that wind resistance is proportional to velocity, then the downward velocity, v, of a body of mass m falling vertically is given by:

v=(mg/k)(1-e[tex]^{(-kt)/m}[/tex])

where g is the acceleration due to gravity and k is a constant. Find the height, h, above the surface of the Earth as a dunction of time. Assume the body starts at height h[tex]_{0}[/tex]



The Attempt at a Solution



For 1, I know that there is some sort of substitution that I'm just not seeing.

For 2, I basically treated it like a differential equation where v=dh/dt and I get as an antiderivative: (mg/k)(t-(m/k)e[tex]^{(k/m)t}[/tex]

I'm not sure how to get the height equal to 0 so that I can incorporate the h[tex]_{0}[/tex]

Any help is appreciated
?? Nothing is said about the height being 0. The height when t= 0 is [itex]h_0[/itex].
(Actually, two signs are wrong in your integral.)
 

Similar threads

  • · Replies 3 ·
Replies
3
Views
2K
  • · Replies 105 ·
4
Replies
105
Views
11K
Replies
2
Views
2K
Replies
2
Views
2K
Replies
8
Views
2K
  • · Replies 7 ·
Replies
7
Views
2K
Replies
6
Views
3K
  • · Replies 1 ·
Replies
1
Views
1K
  • · Replies 4 ·
Replies
4
Views
2K
  • · Replies 18 ·
Replies
18
Views
2K