Integration by parts (multivariable)

Click For Summary
SUMMARY

The discussion focuses on the application of integration by parts in multivariable calculus, specifically using the formula \int_{\Omega}{{\partial u}\over{\partial x_i}}vdx=-\int_{\Omega}{{\partial v}\over{\partial x_i}}udx. The user seeks clarification on the appropriate substitutions for variables and the correct differential notation, questioning whether dx should be dx_i. The conversation highlights the importance of selecting functions u and v based on the specific integrand, emphasizing that the choice significantly impacts the integration process.

PREREQUISITES
  • Understanding of multivariable calculus concepts
  • Familiarity with the integration by parts formula
  • Knowledge of partial derivatives
  • Experience with differential notation in calculus
NEXT STEPS
  • Study the derivation of the integration by parts formula for multivariable functions
  • Explore examples of integration by parts in higher dimensions
  • Learn about the implications of dropping surface terms in multivariable integrals
  • Investigate the role of differential forms in multivariable calculus
USEFUL FOR

Students and educators in advanced calculus, particularly those focusing on multivariable integration techniques, as well as researchers needing to apply integration by parts in their work.

Pacopag
Messages
193
Reaction score
4

Homework Statement


I can find on Wikipedia the "formula" for integration by parts for the case where there is a multi-variable integrand, but I would like to know what substitutions to make in order to show my steps.


Homework Equations


For multiple variables we have
\int_{\Omega}{{\partial u}\over{\partial x_i}}vdx=-\int_{\Omega}{{\partial v}\over{\partial x_i}}udx.
assuming that we can drop the surface term for physical reasons. Here, u and v are functions of several variables, say {x_1, x_2, ...x_n}
First of all, should the dx be a dx_i ??
Now, my real question is; what substitutions do I make in order to show this?


The Attempt at a Solution


I feel like the generalization from 1D to the above higher-D version should be obvious, but it just isn't to me. I guess what is bothering me is that e.g.
du = \sum {{\partial u}\over{\partial x_i}}dx_i. And I can't get this to fit into a derivation of the equation in 2. (above)
 
Physics news on Phys.org
Just as in one variable calculus, what you choose to be u and what you choose to be dv depends heavily on the particular function you are trying to integrate! Do you have a particular example to show us?
 
I don't have particular functions to work with. I have a sum like
\sum_{i} \int dx_{1}...dx_{n}dp_{1}...dp_{n} A t \left( {\partial H \over {\partial x_{i}}}{\partial \rho \over \partial p_{i}}-{\partial H \over {\partial p_{i}}}{\partial \rho \over \partial x_{i}} \right),
and I am just trying to bring the derivatives from \rho over to the A. Here, \rho and A are functions of the x_i and p_i's, and t is time, i.e an independent variable.

What would be nice is a derivation of the integration by parts formula in part 2. of my original post
 
Last edited:

Similar threads

Replies
3
Views
2K
Replies
21
Views
2K
  • · Replies 9 ·
Replies
9
Views
2K
Replies
2
Views
1K
Replies
10
Views
3K
Replies
10
Views
2K
  • · Replies 4 ·
Replies
4
Views
2K
  • · Replies 18 ·
Replies
18
Views
3K
  • · Replies 16 ·
Replies
16
Views
2K
  • · Replies 5 ·
Replies
5
Views
2K