- #1

gnome

- 1,037

- 1

f(x,y) = ∫

_{x}

^{y}cos(t

^{2}) dt

are they simply:

∂f/∂x = -2xcos(x

^{2})

and

∂f/∂y = 2ycos(y

^{2})

or am I completely lost here?

You are using an out of date browser. It may not display this or other websites correctly.

You should upgrade or use an alternative browser.

You should upgrade or use an alternative browser.

- Thread starter gnome
- Start date

- #1

gnome

- 1,037

- 1

f(x,y) = ∫

are they simply:

∂f/∂x = -2xcos(x

and

∂f/∂y = 2ycos(y

or am I completely lost here?

- #2

NateTG

Science Advisor

Homework Helper

- 2,452

- 6

Are you sure it's not

∂f/∂x=-cos(x^{2})

and

∂f/∂y=-cos(y^{2})

?

∂f/∂x=-cos(x

and

∂f/∂y=-cos(y

?

- #3

gnome

- 1,037

- 1

No, I'm definitely not sure. Are you?

- #4

NateTG

Science Advisor

Homework Helper

- 2,452

- 6

∫cos(t

then

dg/dt= cos(t

Now we have

∫

so I get

∂f/∂x=-cos(x

∂f/∂y=cos(y

Does that make sense to you?

- #5

gnome

- 1,037

- 1

I'm not sure. It's confusing.

Isn't this a composite function that calls for use of the chain rule?

I'm thinking that we have g(t) = t^{2} and the integral is f(g(t)) which gets evaluated at t=y and t=x, thus becoming f(g(x)) and f(g(y)), so cos(y^{2}) - cos(x^{2}) is df/dg and we still have to differentiate that wrt x to get ∂f/∂x and wrt y to get ∂f/∂y.

So, I guess I'm saying

∂f/∂x = df/dg * ∂g/∂x [edited: I had the derivatives & the partials reversed]

and

∂f/∂y = df/dg * ∂g/∂y [edited: same reason as above]

Then,

∂f/∂x = ∂/∂x[cos(y^{2}) - cos(x^{2})] = -2xcos(x^{2})

and

∂f/∂y = ∂/∂y[cos(y^{2}) - cos(x^{2})] = 2ycos(y^{2})

But I'm not sure I have the f's and g's right, & maybe all of that is nonsense.

Isn't this a composite function that calls for use of the chain rule?

I'm thinking that we have g(t) = t

So, I guess I'm saying

∂f/∂x = df/dg * ∂g/∂x [edited: I had the derivatives & the partials reversed]

and

∂f/∂y = df/dg * ∂g/∂y [edited: same reason as above]

Then,

∂f/∂x = ∂/∂x[cos(y

and

∂f/∂y = ∂/∂y[cos(y

But I'm not sure I have the f's and g's right, & maybe all of that is nonsense.

Last edited:

- #6

HallsofIvy

Science Advisor

Homework Helper

- 43,021

- 970

d/dx(∫

(db/dx)f(x,b(x))- (da/dx)f(x,a(x)+ ∫

It doesn't matter that you are dealing with two variables, x, y, since with partial derivatives you are treating one of them as a constant.

In particular, ∂/∂x(∫

∂/∂y(∫

- #7

NateTG

Science Advisor

Homework Helper

- 2,452

- 6

Originally posted by HallsofIvy

Leibniz's formula is very general:

d/dx(∫^{b(x)}_{a(x)}f(x,t)dt)=

(db/dx)f(x,b(x))- (da/dx)f(x,a(x)+ ∫^{b(x)}_{a(x)}(∂f(x,t)/∂t dt)

I think you're mixing your variables. You should probably use something other than f and x inside the integral.

I also don't understand how Leibnitz's formula applies, since there is no multi-variable function inside the integral.

As I stated above, all you need to do is apply the fundemental theorem of calculus.

- #8

NateTG

Science Advisor

Homework Helper

- 2,452

- 6

Let's digress for a moment and look at the fundemental theorem of calculus:

∫

Now, let's say we have some g(t) so that g'(t)=cos(t

∫

Now, since g'(t)=cos(t

∂/∂x g(x) = g'(x)=cos(x

and

∂/∂x g(y) = 0

Does that make sense?

- #9

gnome

- 1,037

- 1

f(x) = cos(2x-1)

f'(x) = -2sin(2x-1) (of this, I'm certain)

-------------------------------------

Now, what you're telling me is

g(x) = ∫sin(2x-1)dx

g'(x) = sin(2x-1)

Right?

And the more I think about that, the more sense it seems to make. But if you can add anything to that to make it clearer, please do.

Thanks.

- #10

NateTG

Science Advisor

Homework Helper

- 2,452

- 6

You've pretty much got it.

- #11

HallsofIvy

Science Advisor

Homework Helper

- 43,021

- 970

No, I was not mixing variables. It was necessary to use f and x "inside the integral" because they appeared outside the intergral. The only dummy variable was t.I think you're mixing your variables. You should probably use something other than f and x inside the integral.

Leibnitz's formula still applies, the last integral happens to be 0. The original question was about how you handled functions of x in the limits of integration. Leibnitz's formula does that nicely.I also don't understand how Leibnitz's formula applies, since there is no multi-variable function inside the integral.

Share:

- Last Post

- Replies
- 2

- Views
- 642

- Last Post

- Replies
- 6

- Views
- 1K

- Last Post

- Replies
- 14

- Views
- 3K

- Last Post

- Replies
- 3

- Views
- 770

- Last Post

- Replies
- 4

- Views
- 1K

- Last Post

- Replies
- 9

- Views
- 745

- Last Post

- Replies
- 3

- Views
- 596

- Replies
- 6

- Views
- 731

- Replies
- 2

- Views
- 627

- Replies
- 1

- Views
- 769