Integration of a term that is squared, cubed, etc.

  • Context: Undergrad 
  • Thread starter Thread starter hoomanya
  • Start date Start date
  • Tags Tags
    Integration Term
Click For Summary

Discussion Overview

The discussion revolves around the mathematical relationship involving the integration of the square of a derivative, specifically whether the equation \(\int(\frac{du}{dx})^{2}dV=\int\frac{du}{dx}dV\int\frac{du}{dx}dV\) holds true. Participants explore this in the context of solid deformation and finite element analysis, considering both one-dimensional and multi-dimensional scenarios.

Discussion Character

  • Debate/contested
  • Mathematical reasoning
  • Conceptual clarification

Main Points Raised

  • Some participants question the validity of the equation, noting that the left-hand side involves a single differential volume element \(dV\), while the right-hand side implies a product of two differential volume elements, suggesting a discrepancy.
  • Counterexamples are provided, such as letting \(u(x) = x\) and \(v = x\), which illustrate that the left-hand side and right-hand side yield different results.
  • Participants discuss the implications of the divergence theorem, with one suggesting a reformulation of the equation using this theorem, while others seek clarification on the dimensional context of the variables involved.
  • There is uncertainty regarding whether the relationship is purely mathematical or context-dependent, with some arguing that the truth of the equation may vary based on the definitions of the symbols used.
  • Further inquiries are made about potential generalizations or contexts where a similar relationship might hold, especially in higher dimensions.

Areas of Agreement / Disagreement

Participants do not reach a consensus on the validity of the original equation. Multiple competing views are presented, particularly regarding the interpretation of the terms and the implications of dimensionality.

Contextual Notes

Limitations include the need for clarification on the definitions of \(dV\), the dimensionality of the problem, and the specific context of solid deformation and finite element analysis. The discussion reflects uncertainty about the general applicability of the proposed relationship.

Who May Find This Useful

Readers interested in mathematical relationships in physics, particularly in the context of solid mechanics and finite element analysis, may find this discussion relevant.

hoomanya
Messages
86
Reaction score
0
Hi,

I was wondering if the following statement is correct:

[itex]\int[/itex]([itex]\frac{du}{dx}[/itex])[itex]^{2}[/itex]dV=[itex]\int[/itex][itex]\frac{du}{dx}[/itex]dV[itex]\int[/itex][itex]\frac{du}{dx}[/itex]dV

Please help!

Thanks!
 
Physics news on Phys.org
hoomanya said:
Hi,

I was wondering if the following statement is correct:

[itex]\int[/itex]([itex]\frac{du}{dx}[/itex])[itex]^{2}[/itex]dV=[itex]\int[/itex][itex]\frac{du}{dx}[/itex]dV[itex]\int[/itex][itex]\frac{du}{dx}[/itex]dV

Please help!

Thanks!
No because the left hand side has just [itex]dV[/itex], whereas the right hand side has [itex]dV^2[/itex] because you have two of them multiplying together.
 
hoomanya said:
Hi,

I was wondering if the following statement is correct:

[itex]\int[/itex]([itex]\frac{du}{dx}[/itex])[itex]^{2}[/itex]dV=[itex]\int[/itex][itex]\frac{du}{dx}[/itex]dV[itex]\int[/itex][itex]\frac{du}{dx}[/itex]dV

Please help!

Thanks!
Counterexample: let u(x) = x, v = x.
 
Thank you both. pmsrw3 I am not bothered with solving the integral.

Can I write it as something like this then, using the divergence theorem:

[itex]\int[/itex]([itex]\frac{du}{dx}[/itex])[itex]^{2}[/itex]dV=[itex]\frac{1}{V}[/itex][itex]\int[/itex]u.n dS[itex][/itex][itex]\int[/itex]u.n dS

Cheers!
 
hoomanya said:
Thank you both. pmsrw3 I am not bothered with solving the integral.
?

But the example I gives shows that your speculated relationship doesn't hold. It doesn't matter whether you want an explicit solution or not.

Can I write it as something like this then, using the divergence theorem:

[itex]\int[/itex]([itex]\frac{du}{dx}[/itex])[itex]^{2}[/itex]dV=[itex]\frac{1}{V}[/itex][itex]\int[/itex]u.n dS[itex][/itex][itex]\int[/itex]u.n dS

Cheers!
Wait a minute, I think this needs some clarification. Is dV a volume element? In how many dimensions, and what is x? What's the context?
 
Sorry, I don't get the counter example. Thank you for your quick responses.

Wait a minute, I think this needs some clarification. Is dV a volume element? In how many dimensions, and what is x? What's the context?

V is a volume integral, x is a dimension and u is displacement. The problem is 1D and the context is solid deformation and finite element analysis.

By the way, does it depend on the context or is it a mathematical relationship (if it's correct)?

Thanks again.
 
hoomanya said:
Sorry, I don't get the counter example.
If u(x) = x, du/dx = 1. If v=x, dv=dx. The left-hand-side integral is therefore x+C1. The RHS integrals comes to (x+C2)(x+C3). Obviously the LHS and RHS aren't equal.



V is a volume integral, x is a dimension and u is displacement. The problem is 1D and the context is solid deformation and finite element analysis.
OK, then I completely don't get the question. If you're in one dimension and it's a volume integral, doesn't that mean V = x? In one dimension, the surface of a region is just two points, the left and right ends (assuming the region is contiguous), and the normal vector n is -1 at one end, +1 at the other end. In other words, the divergence theorem in one dimension is nothing but the familiar

[tex]\int_a^b \frac{du}{dx}dx = u(b) - u(a)[/tex]

I think you have the idea that the fact the the integrand is the square of the derivative of something makes it special. But it doesn't, you know: ANY (well-behaved) function can be expressed as the square of the derivative of something. [itex]\int(\frac{du}{dx})^2 dV[/itex] is no more special than [itex]\int u dV[/itex].

By the way, does it depend on the context or is it a mathematical relationship (if it's correct)?
Both could be true. The truth or falsehood of an equation will depend on what the symbols mean. For instance you can't tell me whether the inequality [itex]x^2 \geq 0[/itex] is true or false unless I tell you what kind of values are allowed for x.
 
Thanks a lot.If the problem was not 1D and you had to write the left hand side of the equation in terms of a product the two terms I have on the RHS(after using the divergence theorem), would there be a way? Or is there a context or a situation this or something similar would hold?
 
hoomanya said:
Thanks a lot.If the problem was not 1D and you had to write the left hand side of the equation in terms of a product the two terms I have on the RHS(after using the divergence theorem), would there be a way? Or is there a context or a situation this or something similar would hold?
Maybe you should explain where this question comes from and what you're trying to do.
 
  • #10
Thanks for trying to help. It would be too complicated to explain the entire context. I posted the question hoping this is a general mathematical relations or something close. But you helped understanding that it probably isn't. So thanks for that!
 
  • #11
I think I know where the first equation I wrote is coming from... To do with finite elements ... :D
 

Similar threads

  • · Replies 2 ·
Replies
2
Views
3K
  • · Replies 4 ·
Replies
4
Views
3K
  • · Replies 27 ·
Replies
27
Views
3K
  • · Replies 22 ·
Replies
22
Views
4K
  • · Replies 11 ·
Replies
11
Views
3K
  • · Replies 8 ·
Replies
8
Views
3K
  • · Replies 6 ·
Replies
6
Views
3K
  • · Replies 17 ·
Replies
17
Views
6K
  • · Replies 3 ·
Replies
3
Views
3K
  • · Replies 16 ·
Replies
16
Views
4K