Integration by Parts with sin and ln(x)

Join the discussion
Registration is free. Ask a follow-up in this thread, or start your own.
10 replies · 5K views
Ayesh
Messages
29
Reaction score
0

Homework Statement




The method to use to integrate the function is up to us.
The choices are:
1) U-substitution
2)Integration by Parts
3)Trigonometric integrals
4)Trigonometric substitution
5)Partial fraction


Homework Equations



According to me, the best way to do it is to use Integration by Parts.

Here is the function:

[tex]\int[/tex]sin(ln(x))/x2


The Attempt at a Solution



u=sin(lnx)
du=cos(lnx)/x dx
dv=1/x2 dx
v=-1/x

[tex]\int[/tex]sin(lnx)/x2 dx = -sin(lnx)/x - [tex]\int[/tex] -cos(lnx)/x2 dx
= -sin(lnx)/x + [tex]\int[/tex] cos(lnx)/x2 dx
= -sin(lnx)/x + (-cos(lnx)/x2 - [tex]\int[/tex] sin(lnx)/x dx

2 [tex]\int[/tex] sin(lnx)/x2 dx = -sin(lnx)/x - cos(lnx)/x2 dx

[tex]\int[/tex]sin(lnx)/x2dx = 1/2(-sin(lnx)/x - cos(lnx)/x2)



According to Maple, the answer is 1/2((-2sin(lnx) - 2cos(1/2ln(x))2 + 1 + 2sin(1/2ln(x))cos(1/2lnx))/x
 
Last edited:
Physics news on Phys.org
Hi Ayesh! :smile:

(have an integral: ∫ and try using the X2 tag just above the Reply box :wink:)
Ayesh said:
…Int sin(lnx)/x^2 dx = 1/2(-sin(lnx)/x - cos(lnx)/x^2)

No, almost but not quite …

(and I'm afraid what you've written is too difficult to read for me to work out where the error was :redface:
According to Maple, the answer is 1/2((-2sin(lnx) - 2cos(1/2ln(x))^2 + 1 + 2sin(1/2ln(x))cos(1/2lnx))/x

oh, this is just Maple going beserk :rolleyes:

if you simplify that, you'll get something much more sensible :wink:
 
The answer Maple gave me is simplified.
 
This is the most simplified answer Maple gives me :

-(1/2)*(2sin(lnx)+2cos((1/2)ln(x))2-1-2sin((1/2)lnx)*cos((1/2)lnx))/x
 
I've redone the integration by hand and my answer now is:

[tex]\int[/tex]sin(lnx)/x2 = 1/2 (-sin(lnx) + cos(lnx)/x)
 
Hi Ayesh! :smile:

(what happened to that ∫ i gave you? :wink:)
vela said:
Closer, but you flipped a sign somewhere.

You can always differentiate your answer and see if you recover the integrand to see if your answer is correct.

I strongly agree. :smile:

Getting the sign wrong in integration by parts is notoriously easy,

so it's essential to check the answer by differentiating it (especially if the question has obviously been designed to put in as many minuses as possible!) :wink:
 
I found my mistake, thank you!

Differentiating was a good idea :)
 
You could also have substituted x = exp(u) and then have done the partial integration. In that case there is an alternative method to partial integration that is not on your list:

6) Differentiation w.r.t. to a parameter.

If 6) works that's usually a lot easier than partial integration.