Integrating a x^k ln(x) Function with Gamma Function

Click For Summary

Homework Help Overview

The problem involves evaluating the integral \(- \int^1_0 x^k\ln{x}\,dx\) and expressing it in terms of the gamma function, specifically showing that it equals \(\frac{1}{(k+1)^2}\) for \(k > -1\.

Discussion Character

  • Exploratory, Assumption checking, Mathematical reasoning

Approaches and Questions Raised

  • Participants discuss various substitution methods to transform the integral into a form suitable for the gamma function. There are attempts to apply integration by parts and concerns about changing the limits of integration from (0 to 1) to (0 to infinity).

Discussion Status

Some participants express confusion about the necessity of using the gamma function for this integral, while others suggest specific substitutions. There is a recognition of the challenges in adjusting the limits of integration, and some guidance is provided regarding the substitution \(x=e^{-u/k}\), though clarity on the limits remains unresolved.

Contextual Notes

Participants note the imposed requirement to use the gamma function, which adds complexity to the problem. There is also a mention of potential errors in the substitution process that could affect the outcome.

clandarkfire
Messages
31
Reaction score
0

Homework Statement


"Show that - \int^1_0 x^k\ln{x}\,dx = \frac{1}{(k+1)^2} ; k > -1.

Hint: rewrite as a gamma function.

Homework Equations


Well, I know that \Gamma \left( x \right) = \int\limits_0^\infty {t^{x - 1} e^{ - t} dt}.

The Attempt at a Solution


I've tried various substitutions, beginning with u=k*ln(x), but I'm not getting very far. To write it as a gamma function, I'd have to change the limits from (0 to 1) to (0 to infinity) and I can't find a way to do that.

Can someone point me in the right direction?
 
Physics news on Phys.org
I wonder why you should use the \Gamma function for this elementary integral. Perhaps I'm missing something, but if I'm not wrong, it should be pretty easily solvable by integration by parts.

If you are forced to use the \Gamma function, I'd indeed try the substitution
x=\exp (-u/k),
which leads to an integral you can evaluate immediately in terms of the \Gamma function.
 
  • Like
Likes   Reactions: 1 person
It does seem pretty straightforward with integration by parts, but since I'm told to use the gamma function, I'd at least like to know how to do that.
If I use the substitution x=e^{-u/k}, I get dx = -k*e^{-u/k}\,du The integral then becomes \int^1_0 e^{-u}*-\frac{u}{k}*-k*e^{-u/k}\,du = \int^1_0 e^{-(u + \frac{u}{k})}u\,du,
but the problem remains that it's between 0 and 1, not 0 and infinity. How do I get to a gamma function from there?
Thanks!
 
clandarkfire said:
It does seem pretty straightforward with integration by parts, but since I'm told to use the gamma function, I'd at least like to know how to do that.
If I use the substitution x=e^{-u/k}, I get dx = -k*e^{-u/k}\,du

Isn't that a ##\frac {-1} k## instead of ##-k## out in front?

The integral then becomes \int^1_0 e^{-u}*-\frac{u}{k}*-k*e^{-u/k}\,du = \int^1_0 e^{-(u + \frac{u}{k})}u\,du,
but the problem remains that it's between 0 and 1, not 0 and infinity. How do I get to a gamma function from there?
Thanks!

If ##x=e^{-u/k}## and ##x## goes from ##0## to ##1##, how do you get ##u## going from ##0## to ##1##?
 
Ah! That clears it up. Thanks!
 

Similar threads

  • · Replies 14 ·
Replies
14
Views
3K
  • · Replies 105 ·
4
Replies
105
Views
11K
  • · Replies 9 ·
Replies
9
Views
2K
  • · Replies 5 ·
Replies
5
Views
2K
  • · Replies 6 ·
Replies
6
Views
2K
  • · Replies 3 ·
Replies
3
Views
3K
  • · Replies 7 ·
Replies
7
Views
2K
  • · Replies 14 ·
Replies
14
Views
2K
  • · Replies 5 ·
Replies
5
Views
2K
  • · Replies 43 ·
2
Replies
43
Views
5K