Integrating the Error-function: Using Differentiation under the Integral Sign

  • Thread starter Thread starter Nikitin
  • Start date Start date
  • Tags Tags
    Integral
Click For Summary

Homework Help Overview

The discussion revolves around evaluating the integral \(\int_{-\infty}^{\infty} \beta^2 e^{-\beta^2} d \beta\) using known results about Gaussian integrals. Participants are tasked with showing that this integral equals \(\sqrt{\pi}/2\) based on the provided integral of the Gaussian function.

Discussion Character

  • Exploratory, Conceptual clarification, Mathematical reasoning, Problem interpretation

Approaches and Questions Raised

  • Some participants discuss the use of integration by parts, with one expressing frustration over an unsuccessful attempt that led to zero. Others suggest differentiating under the integral sign as a potentially simpler method. Questions arise regarding the validity of the integration by parts setup and the handling of limits.

Discussion Status

Participants are exploring different methods to approach the problem, including integration by parts and differentiation under the integral sign. There is a recognition of the potential effectiveness of these methods, but no consensus has been reached on the best approach. Some participants express confusion about the integration by parts technique and the application of limits.

Contextual Notes

Participants note the importance of correctly applying integration techniques and the potential for mistakes in the setup of integration by parts. There is also mention of the textbook's intention to teach differentiation under the integral sign as a key technique for solving the problem.

Nikitin
Messages
734
Reaction score
27

Homework Statement


If you know
[tex]\int_{-\infty}^{\infty} e^{-\alpha \beta^2} d \beta = \sqrt{\pi / \alpha}[/tex]
Show that
[tex]\int_{-\infty}^{\infty} \beta^2 e^{-\beta^2} d \beta = \sqrt{\pi}/2[/tex]

The Attempt at a Solution



I have tried integration by parts on the second integral, but to no avail. I just end up with it being equal to zero. What am I to do?
 
Physics news on Phys.org
Nikitin said:

Homework Statement


If you know
[tex]\int_{-\infty}^{\infty} e^{-\alpha \beta^2} d \beta = \sqrt{\pi / \alpha}[/tex]
Show that
[tex]\int_{-\infty}^{\infty} \beta^2 e^{-\beta^2} d \beta = \sqrt{\pi}/2[/tex]

The Attempt at a Solution



I have tried integration by parts on the second integral, but to no avail. I just end up with it being equal to zero. What am I to do?

How did you split the integrand up when you did integration by parts?
 
You don't really need to do integration by parts. Take the derivative with respect to ##\alpha## of both sides of your first equation. Then set ##\alpha=1##.
 
Dick said:
You don't really need to do integration by parts. Take the derivative with respect to ##\alpha## of both sides of your first equation. Then set ##\alpha=1##.

This is a very nice trick, and I like it a lot. But it could be Nikitin needs to work on integration by parts.
 
brmath said:
This is a very nice trick, and I like it a lot. But it could be Nikitin needs to work on integration by parts.

Yes, probably. It's easy enough to do that way too.
 
Yeah, I must've done a silly mistake when doing the integration by parts. I set the ## \beta^2 ## term as u, and the ##e^{ -\beta^2} ## term as v'.

Then, (btw, how do I put limits on the left part of a bracket in latex?)

[tex]\int_{-\infty}^{\infty} \beta^2 e^{-\beta^2} d \beta = \left [ \beta^2 \int e^{-\beta^2} d \beta \right ]_{-\infty}^{\infty} - \int_{-\infty}^{\infty} 2 \beta (\int_{-\infty}^{\infty} e^{-\beta^2} d \beta ) d \beta[/tex]

If I try to insert
[tex]\int_{-\infty}^{\infty} e^{-\beta^2} d \beta = \sqrt{\pi}[/tex]

into my integration by parts expression, I will just end up with 0. Can somebody please do it properly so I can find my mistake?

PS: Sorry for late reply. Oh, and thanks for all the help and nice tips :)

Dick said:
You don't really need to do integration by parts. Take the derivative with respect to ##\alpha## of both sides of your first equation. Then set ##\alpha=1##.

I don't want to be a bore (I like your method), but how do you know it's possible to differentiate the term inside the integral first, instead of taking the integral first and then differentiate?
 
Last edited:
Nikitin said:
I don't want to be a bore (I like your method), but how do you know it's possible to differentiate the term inside the integral first, instead of taking the integral first and then differentiate?

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Leibniz_integral_rule And for your integration by parts, put ##dv=\beta e^{-\beta^2} d\beta##. What does that leave for u?
 
Last edited:
I don't completely understand why you'd do that?

Is the integration-by-parts expression in post #6 correct? Why can't I just insert ##\int_{-\infty}^{\infty} e^{-\beta^2} d \beta = \sqrt{\pi}## into the expression and solve?
 
Nikitin said:
I don't completely understand why you'd do that?

Is the integration-by-parts expression in post #6 correct? Why can't I just insert ##\int_{-\infty}^{\infty} e^{-\beta^2} d \beta = \sqrt{\pi}## into the expression and solve?

If you are going to set ##dv=e^{\beta^2}d\beta## then v is the INDEFINITE integral of dv. You don't apply the limits till the end. And that expression doesn't have an elementary indefinite integral. Hence my alternate suggestion.
 
  • Like
Likes   Reactions: 1 person
  • #10
Nikitin said:
Yeah, I must've done a silly mistake when doing the integration by parts. I set the ## \beta^2 ## term as u, and the ##e^{ -\beta^2} ## term as v'.

Then, (btw, how do I put limits on the left part of a bracket in latex?)

[tex]\int_{-\infty}^{\infty} \beta^2 e^{-\beta^2} d \beta = \left [ \beta^2 \int e^{-\beta^2} d \beta \right ]_{-\infty}^{\infty} - \int_{-\infty}^{\infty} 2 \beta (\int_{-\infty}^{\infty} e^{-\beta^2} d \beta ) d \beta[/tex]

If I try to insert
[tex]\int_{-\infty}^{\infty} e^{-\beta^2} d \beta = \sqrt{\pi}[/tex]

into my integration by parts expression, I will just end up with 0. Can somebody please do it properly so I can find my mistake?

PS: Sorry for late reply. Oh, and thanks for all the help and nice tips :)



I don't want to be a bore (I like your method), but how do you know it's possible to differentiate the term inside the integral first, instead of taking the integral first and then differentiate?

Re taking the derivative under the integral, note that the integral is with respect to ##\beta##. For purposes of regarding ##\alpha## as the variable to differentiate against, all the ##\beta## stuff is essentially a constant.

Re integration by parts take u(x) = x and v'(x) = x##e^{-\alpha x^2}##. The new integral will pop up looking very like the one you know to be ##\sqrt {\pi /\alpha}##.
 
  • Like
Likes   Reactions: 1 person
  • #11
Okay, now I fully understand. I didn't think about putting v'(x) = x e^-x^2, as I wasn't aware of
You don't apply the limits till the end. And that expression doesn't have an elementary indefinite integral.

Now everything is clear. Thanks guys!
 
  • #12
Getting back to Dick's method in response #3, I think what your textbook is trying to teach you is the technique of "differentiation under the integral sign." I think this is how the book intended for you to solve the problem.
 

Similar threads

  • · Replies 7 ·
Replies
7
Views
2K
  • · Replies 1 ·
Replies
1
Views
2K
  • · Replies 10 ·
Replies
10
Views
2K
  • · Replies 9 ·
Replies
9
Views
2K
  • · Replies 10 ·
Replies
10
Views
3K
Replies
13
Views
2K
  • · Replies 3 ·
Replies
3
Views
2K
Replies
1
Views
1K
  • · Replies 1 ·
Replies
1
Views
2K
  • · Replies 5 ·
Replies
5
Views
3K