Integration by parts VS. Formula in text

Click For Summary

Homework Help Overview

The discussion revolves around the integration of the function \(\ln(2x-3)\) using two methods: integration by parts and a formula derived from the textbook. Participants are exploring the discrepancies between their results from these methods.

Discussion Character

  • Mixed

Approaches and Questions Raised

  • Participants are comparing results obtained from integration by parts with those from a formula. There are attempts to identify errors in calculations, particularly regarding signs and terms. Questions arise about how to factor expressions correctly and the implications of constants in indefinite integrals.

Discussion Status

Some participants have made progress in correcting their calculations, while others are still struggling to reconcile their results with the textbook formula. There is an ongoing examination of the steps taken and the potential for sign errors, with some guidance provided on the integration process.

Contextual Notes

Participants express frustration with the assignment's requirements and the challenges of using different methods for integration. There is mention of the need to adhere to specific formatting for the assignment.

Saladsamurai
Messages
3,009
Reaction score
7
I am either making the same mistake repeatedly, or I can't factor!

I did this [tex]\int\ln(2x-3)dx[/tex] first by parts and then using the formula [tex]\int\ln u du=u\ln u-u+C[/tex]

By parts I got:
[tex]u=\ln(2x-3)[/tex] dv=dx

so [tex]=x\ln(2x-3)-\int\frac{2x}{2x-3}dx[/tex] and by long division:

[tex]=x\ln(2x-3)\int [1+\frac{3}{2x+3}]dx[/tex]

[tex]=x\ln(2x-3)-x-\frac{3}{2}\ln(2x+3)+C[/tex]



but I can't get that to match the formula result of

[tex](2x-3)\ln(2x-3)-(2x+3)+C[/tex]

Is the by parts correct?

Casey
 
Physics news on Phys.org
I am getting closer, but I must have screwed up a sign or something in the Int by parts...but I can't see where ...
 
that's what i got, let me take the derivative and to check.
 
Last edited:
Okay, so I have fixed a sign error and I get from parts:

[tex]x\ln(2x-3)-x-\frac{3}{2}\ln(2x-3)[/tex] and then multiplying thru

by 2 I get [tex]2x\ln(2x-3)-2x-3\ln(2x-3)[/tex] which is extremely close...but I can't figure out how to factor it properly...

Almost there :)

I just can't figure out to do with that -2x in the "middle" its a term not a factor...
 
For one,

[tex]x\ln(2x-3)\int [1+\frac{3}{2x+3}]dx[/tex]

should have a minus sign within the integral.

In the following step, you've multiplied the - outside the integral(that's supposed to be there :wink:) with that +.
 
it checks out after taking the derivative.
 
neutrino said:
For one,

[tex]x\ln(2x-3)\int [1+\frac{3}{2x+3}]dx[/tex]

should have a minus sign within the integral.

In the following step, you've multiplied the - outside the integral(that's supposed to be there :wink:) with that +.

I don't follow. If I do that integral off to the side I get x+(3/2)ln(2x-3)

and then i distibuted the - sign...

EDIT: I see, I just forgot to put it in the 1st post...scroll down to post#4
 
Last edited:
rocophysics said:
it checks out after taking the derivative.

What does? from which post#. I can't get it to match the formula.

Casey
 
first post, except that the last ln should be ln(2x-3)

i hate the tables, i prefer hand-method :p takes too long and comes with errors because i suck, but is all good.
 
  • #10
My goal though is to get what I got in post #4 to look like the formula from the textbook which looks like this [tex](2x-3)\ln(2x-3)-(2x+3)+C[/tex]

but I have [tex]2x\ln(2x-3)-2x-3\ln(2x-3)+C[/tex]

which is close...how does that factor?

If I factor that don't I just get [tex](2x-3)\ln(2x-3)-2x+C[/tex] ?
 
Last edited:
  • #11
why can't I factor this:smile:??!
 
  • #12
lol that's really hard ... quit obsessing!
 
Last edited:
  • #13
rocophysics said:
lol that's really hard ... quit obsessing!

But it is part of the assignment!
 
  • #14
Saladsamurai said:
But it is part of the assignment!
to put it in table form? eek!

i got:

[tex]\ln{(2x-3)}[2x-3]-x[/tex] ...

but idk what to do after that. and how did you get -2x?
 
  • #15
Maybe it's because what you're trying to find is an indefinite integral, and the answers to different methods employed usually differ by a constant.
 
  • #16
This might help:

[tex]-x+C=-\frac{1}{2}(2x)+C=-\frac{1}{2}(2x-3)+C-\frac{3}{2}=-\frac{1}{2}(2x-3)+C_1[/tex]

In which [tex]C_1=C-\frac{3}{2}[/tex] another constant is.
 
  • #17
salad, I can't quote your post, browser issues. But your "book formula" integral is in error.

[tex](2x-3)\ln(2x-3)-(2x-3)+C[/tex]

should read

[tex]\frac{1}{2}[(2x-3)\ln(2x-3)-(2x-3)]+C[/tex]

(I corrected your sign error)

You cannot in general just use a formula for an integral of f(u) with a direct substitution of u=g(x) into the result. This is because what you are actually doing with a proper substitution is

[tex]\int{f(g(x))}dx = \int{\frac{dx}{du}[f(u)]}du = \int{\frac{f(u)}{u'}}du[/tex]

In this case, u'(x) = 2, so you should divide the final expression by two.

I did not check your integration by parts, but the above correct answer for the formula method tallies with it, except for a constant term :

[tex]x\ln{(2x-3)} - x - \frac{3}{2}\ln{(2x-3)} = \frac{1}{2}(2x)\ln{(2x-3)} - \frac{1}{2}(2x) - \frac{1}{2}(3\ln{(2x-3)}) = \frac{1}{2}[(2x-3)\ln{(2x-3) - 2x}] = \frac{1}{2}[(2x-3)\ln{(2x-3) - (2x - 3)}] + C[/tex]

which all works out.
 
Last edited:

Similar threads

  • · Replies 6 ·
Replies
6
Views
2K
  • · Replies 15 ·
Replies
15
Views
2K
Replies
5
Views
2K
  • · Replies 105 ·
4
Replies
105
Views
11K
  • · Replies 1 ·
Replies
1
Views
1K
  • · Replies 22 ·
Replies
22
Views
3K
  • · Replies 5 ·
Replies
5
Views
2K
Replies
19
Views
2K
  • · Replies 2 ·
Replies
2
Views
1K
  • · Replies 4 ·
Replies
4
Views
2K