Is this a valid operation (integration by parts)?

Click For Summary

Discussion Overview

The discussion revolves around the validity of operations involving integration by parts, specifically in the context of a function defined as f(x) = x sec(f(x)). Participants explore the steps taken to manipulate integrals and the implications of those manipulations, including the use of the Lambert W-function.

Discussion Character

  • Technical explanation
  • Debate/contested
  • Mathematical reasoning

Main Points Raised

  • One participant presents a function and attempts to apply integration by parts, questioning the validity of cancelling dx in the integral manipulation.
  • Another participant introduces the Lambert W-function and provides a potential solution for a related integral, prompting questions about acceptable forms of answers.
  • There is a discussion about the correctness of the manipulation steps, particularly regarding the expression involving f(x) and its derivatives.
  • One participant suggests that the manipulation involving cancelling dx is acceptable, while another questions the absence of a specific term in the integral transformation.
  • Corrections to earlier posts are noted, with participants confirming the adjustments made to the problem definition.

Areas of Agreement / Disagreement

Participants express differing views on the validity of certain mathematical operations, particularly regarding the manipulation of integrals and the use of the Lambert W-function. No consensus is reached on the correctness of all proposed steps.

Contextual Notes

Some assumptions about the functions and their properties may not be fully articulated, and the discussion includes unresolved questions about the validity of specific mathematical transformations.

jam_27
Messages
46
Reaction score
0
Say I have a function,

f(x) = x sec (f(x)) [this is just an example function, the actual problem is more complicated]

g(x) = x f(x), then using integration by parts, I can write

I = abg(x) dx = abx f(x) dx = (f(x) [itex]\frac{x^{2}}{2}[/itex])|[itex]^{b}_{a}[/itex]- [itex]\frac{1}{2}[/itex]ab[itex]\frac{d f(x)}{dx}[/itex] x2 dx

Then can I write the integral as (cancelling dx from the numerator and denominator in integral on the RHS)?

I = (f(x) [itex]\frac{x^{2}}{2}[/itex])|[itex]^{b}_{a}[/itex]- [itex]\frac{1}{2}[/itex]f(a)f(b) x2 df

or,

I = (f(x) [itex]\frac{x^{2}}{2}[/itex])|[itex]^{b}_{a}[/itex]- [itex]\frac{1}{2}[/itex]f(a)f(b) f2 cos2 (f) df ?

This is simplified version of my actual problem. So any inputs will be very useful?

PS: I have edited the originally posted problem definition as it was causing confusion.
 
Last edited:
Physics news on Phys.org
So you need to find the integral

[tex]-\int_a^b xW(-x)dx[/tex]

where ##W## is the Lambert W-function?

What kind of answers are acceptable? A closed form solution? A series solution?

Wolfram alpha gives the following:

[tex]\int - x W(-x)dx = \frac{x^2(1 - W(-x))(2W(-x)^2+1)}{8W(-x)^2}[/tex]

which in term of your notation would be

[tex]\frac{x^2(1 + f(x))(2f(x)^2 +1)}{8f(x)^2}[/tex]
 
I know about the Lambert W-function. As I said, above is a simplified version of my actual problem. so I specifically need to know if my last 2 steps are valid operations. Thanks
 
OK.

jam_27 said:
Then can I write the integral as (cancelling dx from the numerator and denominator in integral on the RHS)?

I = (f(x) [itex]\frac{x^{2}}{2}[/itex])|[itex]^{b}_{a}[/itex]- [itex]\frac{1}{2}[/itex]f(a)f(b) x2 df

I think this is ok.

I = (f(x) [itex]\frac{x^{2}}{2}[/itex])|[itex]^{b}_{a}[/itex]- [itex]\frac{1}{2}[/itex]f(a)f(b) [itex]\frac{f}{e^{f}}[/itex]df ?

Any reason why you don't have ##f^2/e^{2f}##? You have ##x = \frac{f(x)}{e^{f(x)}}## and thus ##x^2 = \frac{f(x)^2}{e^{2f(x)}}##. No?
 
  • Like
Likes   Reactions: 1 person
Thanks, I have corrected the typo and also the original problem definition. Please see if its ok now.
 
Seems fine to me.
 

Similar threads

  • · Replies 11 ·
Replies
11
Views
2K
  • · Replies 6 ·
Replies
6
Views
3K
  • · Replies 31 ·
2
Replies
31
Views
5K
  • · Replies 2 ·
Replies
2
Views
2K
  • · Replies 4 ·
Replies
4
Views
3K
  • · Replies 4 ·
Replies
4
Views
2K
  • · Replies 6 ·
Replies
6
Views
2K
  • · Replies 20 ·
Replies
20
Views
4K
  • · Replies 27 ·
Replies
27
Views
3K
  • · Replies 2 ·
Replies
2
Views
3K