Is it necessary to change the bounds when substituting in a definite integral?

  • Context: Undergrad 
  • Thread starter Thread starter helixkirby
  • Start date Start date
Click For Summary

Discussion Overview

The discussion revolves around the practice of changing bounds when performing substitutions in definite integrals, specifically examining whether it is acceptable to keep the original bounds while substituting and later re-substituting back to the original variable. The scope includes mathematical reasoning and technical explanation related to integration techniques.

Discussion Character

  • Technical explanation
  • Mathematical reasoning
  • Debate/contested

Main Points Raised

  • Some participants question whether it is "bad math" to keep the original bounds during substitution, suggesting that it may lead to confusion or errors.
  • Others argue that it is mathematically valid to perform the indefinite integral and then substitute back to the original variable without changing the bounds initially.
  • A participant emphasizes the importance of being careful with variable tracking when not changing bounds, suggesting that it might be a bad habit.
  • Another participant points out that while it is not "bad math," it may be harder and more prone to error, advocating for changing the bounds to avoid confusion.
  • Some participants provide examples of how to handle the substitution correctly, illustrating both methods of keeping the bounds and changing them.

Areas of Agreement / Disagreement

Participants express differing views on whether it is acceptable to keep the original bounds during substitution. While some believe it is valid, others caution against it, indicating that the discussion remains unresolved with multiple competing perspectives.

Contextual Notes

There are limitations regarding the clarity of notation when changing variables and bounds, as well as the potential for misunderstanding when not explicitly stating the bounds during substitution. The discussion highlights the importance of careful notation and tracking of variables.

helixkirby
Messages
15
Reaction score
0
Is it bad math to do this:

The definite integral from 1 to 2 of 1/(3x+1)

using the substitution u=3x+1, du=3dx
Then changing the integrand but keeping the bounds, then integrating, to (1/3)ln|u| from 1 to 2, then substitute back in u, so then I integrate with the bounds to get (1/3)ln|3x+1| from 1 to 2, getting (1/3)(ln(7)-ln(4)), is it bad math to not change your bounds if you're going to re-substitute anyway?
 
Physics news on Phys.org
I lost you here:
...then integrating, to (1/3)ln|u| from 1 to 2, then substitute back in u, ...
... do you mean the result of the indefinite integral is ln|u|/3 then you... sub u=3x+1... then apply the limits to x?
That would be the normal approach ... you are implicitly changing the bounds twice without going to the trouble of writing it down.
 
Yes, pretty much, that's OK right?
 
Formally it goes like this:
Task: evaluate the following definite integral: $$\int_1^2\frac{\mathrm dx}{3x+1}$$

1. Substitute: ##x+1 \to u : \mathrm dx = \frac{1}{3}\mathrm du## into the indefinite integral and evaluate: $$\frac{1}{3}\int \frac{\mathrm du}{u} = \frac{1}{3}\ln\big|u\big|+c = \frac{1}{3}\ln\big|3x+1\big|+c$$ ...

2. Apply what you have learned (step 1) to the original problem: $$\int_1^2\frac{\mathrm dx}{3x+1} = \frac{1}{3}\bigg[ \ln\big|3x+1\big| \bigg]_1^2 = \frac{1}{3}\ln(7/4)$$

... it is a standard technique in mathematics to solve a problem by first working on a similar but easier problem in the hope that this will shed light on how to solve the original problem. It's like learning to swim in the sea by, first, swimming lengths in a pool.
 
helixkirby said:
Is it bad math to do this:

The definite integral from 1 to 2 of 1/(3x+1)

using the substitution u=3x+1, du=3dx
Then changing the integrand but keeping the bounds, then integrating, to (1/3)ln|u| from 1 to 2,
then substitute back in u, so then I integrate with the bounds to get (1/3)ln|3x+1| from 1 to 2
This is one way to do it. It's good practice though to note that you are leaving the bounds as x values until you actually undo your substitution, like so:
##\int_1^2 \frac {dx}{3x + 1} = \frac 1 3 \int_{x = 1}^2 \frac{du}{u} = \frac 1 3 ln|u| |_{x = 1}^2##
Now you can undo the substitution and evaluate the antiderivative at 2 and 1.[/quote]
helixkirby said:
, getting (1/3)(ln(7)-ln(4)), is it bad math to not change your bounds if you're going to re-substitute anyway?
 
In regards to your original question:-
helixkirby said:
is it bad math to not change your bounds if you're going to re-substitute anyway?
Yes, because many times you can solve definite integrals with just these bounds. (i.e. without performing actual integration)
So if you don't change your bounds when you know your going to re-substitute, you might get into that habit.
 
certainly said:
In regards to your original question:-

Yes, because many times you can solve definite integrals with just these bounds. (i.e. without performing actual integration)
So if you don't change your bounds when you know your going to re-substitute, you might get into that habit.
I wouldn't call this "bad math." If you're careful about keeping track of which variable the bounds are, as I showed in my work, you can get the correct value.

Evaluating a definite integral without actually doing the integration doesn't really come up that much, other than when you're first learning the techniques of integration.
 
It is not "bad math" in the sense of being mathematically invalid but it is, in my opinion, harder and more prone to error.

You have the integral ##\int_1^2\frac{dx}{3x+ 1}## and make the substation u= 3x+ 1 so that du= 3dx.
When x= 1, u= 4 and when x= 2, u= 7 so the integral become ##\frac{1}{3}\int_4^7\frac{du}{u}= \left[\frac{1}{3}ln|u|\right]_4^7= \frac{1}{3}\left(ln(7)- ln(4)\right)= \frac{1}{3}ln\left(\frac{7}{4}\right)##.

But it is mathematically valid to do the indefinite integral ##\frac{1}{3}\int \frac{du}{u}= \frac{1}{3}ln|u|+ C##, change back to x: ##\frac{1}{3}\int \frac{du}{u}= \frac{1}{3}ln|3x+1|+ C## and then evaluate at 1 and 2.

It would be bad notation to change the variable to u and leave the old limits of integration:
##\frac{1}{3}\int_1^2\frac{du}{u}## is completely wrong!
 
Last edited by a moderator:
  • Like
Likes   Reactions: theodoros.mihos

Similar threads

  • · Replies 5 ·
Replies
5
Views
2K
  • · Replies 6 ·
Replies
6
Views
3K
  • · Replies 6 ·
Replies
6
Views
3K
  • · Replies 3 ·
Replies
3
Views
3K
  • · Replies 8 ·
Replies
8
Views
3K
  • · Replies 1 ·
Replies
1
Views
2K
  • · Replies 4 ·
Replies
4
Views
2K
  • · Replies 1 ·
Replies
1
Views
2K
  • · Replies 19 ·
Replies
19
Views
5K
  • · Replies 4 ·
Replies
4
Views
2K