How to differentiare/integrate e^t and the like .

  • Thread starter Thread starter LinearAlgebra
  • Start date Start date
AI Thread Summary
To differentiate and integrate functions involving e^t, the chain rule is essential, particularly when dealing with multiplicative factors like t or t^2. For integrating t*e^t, integration by parts is recommended, where you can set u = t and dv = e^t dt, leading to the formula ∫t*e^t dt = t*e^t - ∫e^t dt. When integrating e^(t^2), no elementary function exists, but the integral can be expressed using special functions, while e^(-t^2) relates to the error function erf(x). The discussion emphasizes the importance of integration by parts as a fundamental technique for these types of integrals.
LinearAlgebra
Messages
22
Reaction score
0
How to differentiare/integrate e^t and the like...

I'm taking linear algebra this semester and completely have forgotten how to integrate and differentiate e functions.

This is within the context of trying to learn how to integrate vector functions...

So how would you integrate t*e^t ? what do you do when there is a multiplicative factor?

How about if it were e^t2? or alternatively e^-2t??

Thanks for the help!:redface:
 
Mathematics news on Phys.org
Use the chain rule to integrate f(t)e^t. You can choose either u = f(t), dv = e^t dt or u = e^t, dv = f(t) dt. With the former approach, \int f(t)e^t = f(t)e^t - \int f^\prime(t) e^t dt, and the latter, \int f(t)e^t = F(t)e^t - \int F(t) e^t dt. Use whichever approach simplifies the result.

There is no elementary function f(t) such that f(t) = \int e^{t^2} dt. You can always define a special function that satisfies this equation. The reason no one has done so is because this integral does not come up very often.

On the other hand, \int e^{-t^2} dt comes up all the time. A special function has been defined based on this integral, the error function \text{erf}(x).
 
DH, thanks a lot for your reply.

Can you please explain further why you use the chain rule?

Also, just to use an example - let's say you have to integrate t^2*e^t? How would you do that?
 
You use integration by parts, which is the chain rule rewritten for integrals.

Choose u = t^2, dv = e^t dt. Then

\int t^2 e^t dt = t^2 e^t - 2\int t e^t dt

Use integration by parts again on the integral on the right hand side

\int t e^t dt = t e^t - \int e^t dt = (t-1)e^t

Now apply this result to the first result,

\int t^2 e^t dt = t^2 e^t - 2(t-1)e^t = (t^2-2t+2)e^t

Verify by differentiating:

\frac d {dt}\left((t^2-2t+2)e^t\right) = (2t-2)e^t + (t^2-2t+2)e^t = t^2e^t
 
My bad! Integration by parts is the product rule rewritten for integrals.
 
Fermat's Last Theorem has long been one of the most famous mathematical problems, and is now one of the most famous theorems. It simply states that the equation $$ a^n+b^n=c^n $$ has no solutions with positive integers if ##n>2.## It was named after Pierre de Fermat (1607-1665). The problem itself stems from the book Arithmetica by Diophantus of Alexandria. It gained popularity because Fermat noted in his copy "Cubum autem in duos cubos, aut quadratoquadratum in duos quadratoquadratos, et...
Insights auto threads is broken atm, so I'm manually creating these for new Insight articles. In Dirac’s Principles of Quantum Mechanics published in 1930 he introduced a “convenient notation” he referred to as a “delta function” which he treated as a continuum analog to the discrete Kronecker delta. The Kronecker delta is simply the indexed components of the identity operator in matrix algebra Source: https://www.physicsforums.com/insights/what-exactly-is-diracs-delta-function/ by...
Thread 'Imaginary Pythagorus'
I posted this in the Lame Math thread, but it's got me thinking. Is there any validity to this? Or is it really just a mathematical trick? Naively, I see that i2 + plus 12 does equal zero2. But does this have a meaning? I know one can treat the imaginary number line as just another axis like the reals, but does that mean this does represent a triangle in the complex plane with a hypotenuse of length zero? Ibix offered a rendering of the diagram using what I assume is matrix* notation...
Back
Top