Is this a typo? - Integral of fraction

  • Thread starter Thread starter anthonyk2013
  • Start date Start date
  • Tags Tags
    Fraction Integral
Click For Summary
SUMMARY

The discussion centers on the potential typo in an integral problem involving the expression ##6x^2-5x+3## divided by ##12x-5##. Participants agree that while the integral appears solvable, there is uncertainty regarding the accuracy of the problem due to its low weight on the exam. The consensus suggests that the integral can be approached through polynomial long division, with emphasis on avoiding mixed numbers in fractions for clarity. The conversation highlights the importance of verifying results through differentiation.

PREREQUISITES
  • Understanding of polynomial long division
  • Familiarity with basic integral calculus
  • Knowledge of differentiation techniques
  • Ability to manipulate algebraic expressions
NEXT STEPS
  • Study polynomial long division techniques in detail
  • Learn about the differentiation of rational functions
  • Research best practices for writing and simplifying fractions
  • Explore common pitfalls in integral calculus and how to avoid them
USEFUL FOR

Students preparing for calculus exams, educators teaching integral calculus, and anyone looking to improve their skills in polynomial manipulation and differentiation.

anthonyk2013
Messages
125
Reaction score
0
Part (1) of this question posted in post 3. Is it a type-o or correct. Not looking for solution.
 
Last edited:
Physics news on Phys.org
Yes, it appears to be so, from what I can see.
 
ImageUploadedByPhysics Forums1420232795.902127.jpg
 
Forgot the image
 
What is a type-o? Or do you think it is a typo? Then type-o probably is a typo.
The integrals look ok so far.
 
Hint for part i): Try to rearrange ##6x^2-5x+3## into some polynome your can divide by ##12x-5## plus a constant.
 
Ya I differentiated the top and you get 12x-5 all over 12x-5.
 
Ah I see. Could be a typo. But this integral should be solvable as well.
 
Part 1&2 only worth 4% on exam paper. Seem like a but of work for 2%
 
  • #10
Part 1&2 only worth 4% on exam paper. Seem like a but of work for 2%

Private theories are not allowed in this forum. :D But don't worry here. Sorry, I can only look at the math.
 
  • #11
Anthonyk, why would you think the problem has a typo? This is an easy integral - just divide the numerator by the denominator.
 
  • #12
Lecturer thinks it is because of the low mark. Looking back a previous exam papers made an assumption. If We are wrong I hold my hand up.
 
  • #13
Mark44 said:
Anthonyk, why would you think the problem has a typo? This is an easy integral - just divide the numerator by the denominator.

That's are far as I got I had x-1.
 
  • #15
Ya silly mistake by me.
 
  • #16
ImageUploadedByPhysics Forums1428103350.262848.jpg


Wondering the the solution the this question is right or wrong ?
Thanks
 
  • #17
What happened in (4)? The denominators vanished?
Also, what happens if you differentiate your result? Do you get the initial fraction? This is often a very easy check you can always do if you are unsure.

The whole substitution is not helpful here. Posts 6 and 11 show the best approach.
 
  • #18
This solution is from class. We were given a reason why that were moved but I can remember.
When studying on my own I divided the polynomial but the devision didn't look right. I'll attempt it again and post later. Thanks.
 
  • #19
ImageUploadedByPhysics Forums1428155238.504936.jpg
 
  • #20
Looks right so far.
 
  • #21
@anthonyk2013, once you've made it past grade school arithmetic, it's not a good idea to write fractions as mixed numbers (such as you have in your work). Instead of ##1 \frac 1 {24}## or ##1 \frac {23} {24}##, you really should write these as improper fractions, 25/24 and 47/24. Mixed numbers such as the ones you wrote are much harder to work with and can easily be confused if not written very carefully.
 
  • #22
Ill finish later. Too many kids around[emoji86]
 
  • #23
Thanks for the reminder mark44. Long time since i was in grade school as you call it
 
  • #24
ImageUploadedByPhysics Forums1428239530.213025.jpg


Latest attempt. Wondered if I'm right.
 
  • #25
Integrating x/2 gave x2/2?
And check what you have in the denominators and logs - but I guess those are just typos.
 
  • #26
Should be X2/4
 

Similar threads

  • · Replies 5 ·
Replies
5
Views
2K
  • · Replies 1 ·
Replies
1
Views
2K
  • · Replies 1 ·
Replies
1
Views
2K
  • · Replies 15 ·
Replies
15
Views
4K
  • · Replies 4 ·
Replies
4
Views
1K
  • · Replies 5 ·
Replies
5
Views
2K
  • · Replies 8 ·
Replies
8
Views
3K
  • · Replies 12 ·
Replies
12
Views
3K
  • · Replies 17 ·
Replies
17
Views
5K
  • · Replies 7 ·
Replies
7
Views
2K