Is This Calculation of Work Involving an Exponential Function Correct?

  • Thread starter Thread starter kabailey
  • Start date Start date
  • Tags Tags
    Integral
kabailey
Messages
16
Reaction score
0
W=∫0PdV



P=e-v2



Do I simply substitue P in the original equation, differentiate, then integrate?

W=∫0e-v2dV

W=∫0(e-v2)/2v

So far is this correct?
 
Physics news on Phys.org
kabailey said:
W=∫0PdV
P=e-v2
Do I simply substitue P in the original equation, differentiate, then integrate?

W=∫0e-v2dV

W=∫0(e-v2)/2v

So far is this correct?

No, it isn't. That integral is usually worked by a trick of multiplying it by itself and changing it to polar coordinates. See
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Gaussian_integral
There they do it from ##-\infty## to ##\infty##, but the same idea applies.
 
LCKurtz said:
No, it isn't. That integral is usually worked by a trick of multiplying it by itself and changing it to polar coordinates. See
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Gaussian_integral
There they do it from ##-\infty## to ##\infty##, but the same idea applies.

I was not familiar with the Gaussian intergral. Well since it's only half the distance I would divide by 2 ∴

W=∫0e-v2dV

=(√∏)/2|0

so does that mean that the interval of ∞ to 0 is negligible?
 
kabailey said:
I was not familiar with the Gaussian intergral. Well since it's only half the distance I would divide by 2 ∴

W=∫0e-v2dV

=(√∏)/2|0

so does that mean that the interval of ∞ to 0 is negligible?

The integrand is an even function so, yes, you can just divide the full integral by 2. The integal from on ##[-\infty,0]## equals the integral over ##[0,\infty]##.
 
thank you for your help. my final answer is W=(√∏)/2
 
kabailey said:
thank you for your help. my final answer is W=(√∏)/2

That's correct.
 
There are two things I don't understand about this problem. First, when finding the nth root of a number, there should in theory be n solutions. However, the formula produces n+1 roots. Here is how. The first root is simply ##\left(r\right)^{\left(\frac{1}{n}\right)}##. Then you multiply this first root by n additional expressions given by the formula, as you go through k=0,1,...n-1. So you end up with n+1 roots, which cannot be correct. Let me illustrate what I mean. For this...
Back
Top