Need help on a simple but frustrating integral

  • Context: Undergrad 
  • Thread starter Thread starter Deuterium2H
  • Start date Start date
  • Tags Tags
    Integral
Click For Summary

Discussion Overview

The discussion revolves around the integration of a specific differential equation related to motion, particularly focusing on the integral ds = [ v0 / (1 + kv0t) ] dt. Participants are seeking clarification on the integration process and the implications of the variables involved, particularly the nature of v0.

Discussion Character

  • Technical explanation
  • Mathematical reasoning
  • Debate/contested

Main Points Raised

  • One participant expresses frustration with understanding elementary integrals and requests a step-by-step breakdown of the integration process.
  • Another participant suggests that the integral can be approached using the formula INT [ f'(x) / f(x) ] dx = ln |f(x)| + C, indicating a potential method to solve the integral.
  • A later reply confirms the proposed method but raises a concern about the nature of v0, questioning whether it is a function of time.
  • Another participant clarifies that v0 is actually a constant value, not a function of time, which resolves some confusion regarding the integration.

Areas of Agreement / Disagreement

There is some initial uncertainty regarding the nature of v0, with differing views on whether it is a function of time. However, a consensus is reached that v0 is a constant value.

Contextual Notes

Participants discuss the implications of treating v0 as a function of time versus a constant, which affects the integration process. The discussion does not resolve all aspects of the integration technique itself.

Deuterium2H
Messages
59
Reaction score
0
I am reading Paul J. Nahn's excellent "Mrs. Perkins's Electric Quilt: and other Intriquing Stories of Mathematical Physics".

Unfortunately, while I can understand much of the complex analysis, I sometimes get hung up over the what I believe are rather elementary integrals which are never solved in a step by step fashion...but are just shown and then (with no explanation) given a solution. This can be a bit frustrating, especially if it has been years (decades) since one had advanced Calc, and has forgotten many of the common integral forms/solutions.

Anyways, I didn't even get through the damn Preface without encountering a problem.

We are given the following differential equation (integral):

ds = [ v0 / (1 + kv0t) ] dt

k is a Constant of proportionality, and v0 is initial velocity, which obviously itself is a function of time.

The solution is given as:

s = ln[(1 + kv0t)(1/k)] + Z

How does one integrate the right side of the equation? I can get the sense that the solution will be a natural logarithm, due to the fact that we have a form INTEGRAL (dt/t).
Would someone be so kind as to break this down step by step for me. I am almost embarrassed to ask, but oh well. Thanks in advance!
 
Physics news on Phys.org
Ah sugar...I think I might have remembered something. Is this one of those instances where we have an integral in which the numerator is a derivative of the denominator, and evaluated by the formula:

INT [ f'(x) / f(x) ] dx = ln |f(x)| + C ??

So,

s = (1/k) INT [ (kv0)/(1 + kv0t) ] dt
 
Last edited:
On further thought, I guess that does solve it. Would appreciate someone else's confirmation, however. Thanks again
 
Yup. That's just about right.
 
Char. Limit said:
Yup. That's just about right.

Thanks Char. Limit,

The only thing troubling me (still) is the fact that v0 is itself a funtion of "t"...and it almost seems like there is a partial derivative involved. However, if I just treat
d(kv0t)/dt = kv0, then it all works out simply.
 
Are you sure that v0 is a function of t?

EDIT: Initial velocity is actually NOT a function of time. Indeed, it's not a function at all! It's a constant value.
 
Char. Limit said:
Are you sure that v0 is a function of t?

EDIT: Initial velocity is actually NOT a function of time. Indeed, it's not a function at all! It's a constant value.

AHHHHH Yes!

Once again, thanks Char. Limit. You are absolutely right, and I had totally overlooked that.
 

Similar threads

  • · Replies 1 ·
Replies
1
Views
2K
  • · Replies 12 ·
Replies
12
Views
3K
  • · Replies 6 ·
Replies
6
Views
3K
  • · Replies 5 ·
Replies
5
Views
4K
  • · Replies 7 ·
Replies
7
Views
2K
  • · Replies 2 ·
Replies
2
Views
3K
  • · Replies 3 ·
Replies
3
Views
1K
  • · Replies 15 ·
Replies
15
Views
2K
  • · Replies 20 ·
Replies
20
Views
2K
  • · Replies 12 ·
Replies
12
Views
3K