MHB Nodes and weight of Gauss Quadrature

AI Thread Summary
The discussion focuses on calculating the node \( x_0 \) and weight \( a_0 \) for Gauss Quadrature with the weight function \( w(x) = 1 + \sqrt{x} \). Initially, \( a_0 \) was calculated as 3, but after further analysis, it was corrected to \( \frac{5}{3} \) by properly integrating the weight function. The node \( x_0 \) was also recalculated and found to be \( \frac{27}{50} \) or 0.54. Participants confirmed that the correct interpretation of the polynomial degree for integration involved \( f(x) = 1 \) and \( f(x) = x \). The final calculations were validated as correct.
mathmari
Gold Member
MHB
Messages
4,984
Reaction score
7
Hey! :giggle:

Calculate the node $x_0$ and the weight $a_0$ of Gauss Quadrature so that $$\int_0^1w(x)f(x)\, dx\approx I_0(f)=a_0f(x_0)$$ where $w(x)=1+\sqrt{x}$.

I have done the following:

The Gauss quadrature formula with $(n + 1)=1$ node (i.e. $n=0$) integrates polynomials of degree $2n + 1=1$ exactly.
\begin{align*}\int_0^1w(x)\cdot 1\, dx=a_0 &\Rightarrow \int_0^1\left (1+\sqrt{x}\right )\cdot 1\, dx=a_0 \\ & \Rightarrow \int_0^1\left (1+\sqrt{x}\right )\, dx=a_0 \\ & \Rightarrow \int_0^1\left (1+x^{\frac{1}{2}}\right )\, dx=a_0 \\ & \Rightarrow \left [x+2x^{\frac{1}{2}+1}\right ]_0^1=a_0 \\ & \Rightarrow \left [x+2x^{\frac{3}{2}}\right ]_0^1=a_0 \\ & \Rightarrow 1+2 =a_0 \\ & \Rightarrow a_0 =3 \\ \int_0^1w(x)\cdot x\, dx=a_0\cdot x_0 &\Rightarrow \int_0^1\left (1+\sqrt{x}\right )\cdot x\, dx=3x_0 \\ & \Rightarrow \int_0^1\left (x+x\sqrt{x}\right )\, dx=3x_0 \\ & \Rightarrow \int_0^1\left (x+x^{\frac{3}{2}}\right )\, dx=3x_0 \\ & \Rightarrow \left [\frac{x^2}{2}+\frac{2}{3}x^{\frac{3}{2}+1}\right ]_0^1=3x_0 \\ & \Rightarrow \left [\frac{x^2}{2}+\frac{2}{3}x^{\frac{5}{2}}\right ]_0^1=3x_0 \\ & \Rightarrow \frac{1}{2}+\frac{2}{3} =3x_0 \\ & \Rightarrow \frac{7}{6} =3x_0 \\ & \Rightarrow x_0=\frac{7}{18} \end{align*}

Is that correct? Or if we say that it integrates polynomials of degree $1$ do we mean that $w(x)f(x)=1$ and $w(x)f(x)=x$ instead of $f(x)=1$ and $f(x)=x$ ?

:unsure:
 
Mathematics news on Phys.org
mathmari said:
Or if we say that it integrates polynomials of degree $1$ do we mean that $w(x)f(x)=1$ and $w(x)f(x)=x$ instead of $f(x)=1$ and $f(x)=x$ ?

Hey mathmari!

I believe it is indeed intended that $f(x)=1$ and $f(x)=x$. (Nod)

mathmari said:
$$ \int_0^1\left (1+x^{\frac{1}{2}}\right )\, dx=a_0 \Rightarrow \left [x+2x^{\frac{1}{2}+1}\right ]_0^1=a_0$$

If we take the derivative of $2x^{\frac{1}{2}+1}$, then we don't get $x^{\frac{1}{2}}$ do we? :oops:

mathmari said:
$$\int_0^1\left (x+x^{\frac{3}{2}}\right )\, dx=3x_0 \Rightarrow \left [\frac{x^2}{2}+\frac{2}{3}x^{\frac{3}{2}+1}\right ]_0^1$$

If we take the derivative of $\frac{2}{3}x^{\frac{3}{2}+1}$, then we don't get $x^{\frac{3}{2}}$ do we? :oops:
 
Klaas van Aarsen said:
If we take the derivative of $2x^{\frac{1}{2}+1}$, then we don't get $x^{\frac{1}{2}}$ do we? :oops:

If we take the derivative of $\frac{2}{3}x^{\frac{3}{2}+1}$, then we don't get $x^{\frac{3}{2}}$ do we? :oops:

Oh yes... :oops:

It should be:
\begin{align*}\int_0^1w(x)\cdot 1\, dx=a_0 &\Rightarrow \int_0^1\left (1+\sqrt{x}\right )\cdot 1\, dx=a_0 \\ & \Rightarrow \int_0^1\left (1+\sqrt{x}\right )\, dx=a_0 \\ & \Rightarrow \int_0^1\left (1+x^{\frac{1}{2}}\right )\, dx=a_0 \\ & \Rightarrow \left [x+\frac{1}{\frac{1}{2}+1}x^{\frac{1}{2}+1}\right ]_0^1=a_0 \\ & \Rightarrow \left [x+\frac{2}{3}x^{\frac{3}{2}}\right ]_0^1=a_0 \\ & \Rightarrow 1+\frac{2}{3} =a_0 \\ & \Rightarrow a_0 =\frac{5}{3}\approx 1.6667 \\ \int_0^1w(x)\cdot x\, dx=a_0\cdot x_0 &\Rightarrow \int_0^1\left (1+\sqrt{x}\right )\cdot x\, dx=\frac{5}{3}x_0 \\ & \Rightarrow \int_0^1\left (x+x\sqrt{x}\right )\, dx=\frac{5}{3}x_0 \\ & \Rightarrow \int_0^1\left (x+x^{\frac{3}{2}}\right )\, dx=\frac{5}{3}x_0 \\ & \Rightarrow \left [\frac{x^2}{2}+\frac{1}{\frac{3}{2}+1}x^{\frac{3}{2}+1}\right ]_0^1=\frac{5}{3}x_0 \\ & \Rightarrow \left [\frac{x^2}{2}+\frac{2}{5}x^{\frac{5}{2}}\right ]_0^1=\frac{5}{3}x_0 \\ & \Rightarrow \frac{1}{2}+\frac{2}{5} =\frac{5}{3}x_0 \\ & \Rightarrow \frac{9}{10} =\frac{5}{3}x_0 \\ & \Rightarrow x_0=\frac{27}{50}=0,54 \end{align*}
:geek:
 
mathmari said:
It should be:
:geek:
It looks correct to me now. (Nod)
 
Klaas van Aarsen said:
It looks correct to me now. (Nod)

Great! Thank you! 👏
 
Suppose ,instead of the usual x,y coordinate system with an I basis vector along the x -axis and a corresponding j basis vector along the y-axis we instead have a different pair of basis vectors ,call them e and f along their respective axes. I have seen that this is an important subject in maths My question is what physical applications does such a model apply to? I am asking here because I have devoted quite a lot of time in the past to understanding convectors and the dual...
Fermat's Last Theorem has long been one of the most famous mathematical problems, and is now one of the most famous theorems. It simply states that the equation $$ a^n+b^n=c^n $$ has no solutions with positive integers if ##n>2.## It was named after Pierre de Fermat (1607-1665). The problem itself stems from the book Arithmetica by Diophantus of Alexandria. It gained popularity because Fermat noted in his copy "Cubum autem in duos cubos, aut quadratoquadratum in duos quadratoquadratos, et...
Insights auto threads is broken atm, so I'm manually creating these for new Insight articles. In Dirac’s Principles of Quantum Mechanics published in 1930 he introduced a “convenient notation” he referred to as a “delta function” which he treated as a continuum analog to the discrete Kronecker delta. The Kronecker delta is simply the indexed components of the identity operator in matrix algebra Source: https://www.physicsforums.com/insights/what-exactly-is-diracs-delta-function/ by...
Back
Top