Proof of Integrals: Find Solutions Here

  • Context: Undergrad 
  • Thread starter Thread starter lazypast
  • Start date Start date
  • Tags Tags
    Integrals Proof
Click For Summary

Discussion Overview

The discussion revolves around the proofs of specific integral formulas, particularly focusing on the integrals of the forms \(\int \frac {1} {(x^2 - a^2)^{0.5}}\) and \(\int \frac {1} {x^2 + a^2}\). Participants explore various methods for deriving these integrals, including trigonometric and hyperbolic substitutions, and engage in a dialogue about the techniques involved in integration.

Discussion Character

  • Exploratory
  • Technical explanation
  • Mathematical reasoning
  • Debate/contested

Main Points Raised

  • One participant expresses a desire to understand the origins of certain integral formulas rather than just their results.
  • Several participants suggest using trigonometric substitutions, such as \(x = a \sec \theta\) and \(x = a \tan \theta\), to simplify the integrals.
  • Another participant proposes using hyperbolic substitutions, specifically \(x = a \sinh t\), for the first integral.
  • There is a discussion about the effectiveness of trigonometric substitutions, with some participants questioning why they are particularly useful.
  • One participant emphasizes that trigonometric substitutions are a specific case of integration by substitution, aimed at simplifying integrals.
  • Another participant mentions that for the second integral, a proof can be achieved by differentiating the right side rather than deriving it through substitution.
  • Participants discuss the importance of including 'dx' in integrals and the implications of omitting it during substitution.
  • There are various mathematical identities and relationships mentioned, such as \(1 + \tan^2 \theta = \sec^2 \theta\) and the relationships involving hyperbolic functions.
  • One participant provides a detailed proof for the second integral using the Fundamental Theorem of Calculus, while another expresses gratitude for the clarity of the explanation.

Areas of Agreement / Disagreement

Participants generally agree on the utility of trigonometric and hyperbolic substitutions for simplifying integrals, but there are differing opinions on the necessity of these methods versus direct proofs through differentiation. The discussion remains unresolved regarding the best approach to proving the integrals.

Contextual Notes

Some participants note the importance of understanding the context and assumptions behind substitutions, as well as the potential for different methods to yield the same results. There is an acknowledgment of the need for clarity in notation, particularly regarding the differential 'dx'.

lazypast
Messages
83
Reaction score
0
I have just been shown integrals without proof and would rather understand where they came from. I'm sure these have been posted somewhere on here but don't know what to search for. If a website have all these proofs Ill gladly look at them.

[tex] \int \frac {1} {(x^2 - a^2)^{0.5}} = ln(x + (x^2 - a^2)^{0.5})[/tex]

and
[tex] \int \frac {1} {x^2 + a^2} = \frac {1} {a} tan^{-1}( \frac {x} {a} )[/tex]

thanks
 
Last edited:
Physics news on Phys.org
1. Let [tex]x = a\sec \theta[/tex]

2. Let [tex]x = a\tan \theta[/tex]
 
Well, try some trigonometric substitution and see where it gets you. I think you can use [tex]x = a \sec \theta[/tex] for the first integral.

Edit: oops, too late.
 
For the first instead of sec, you might try [itex]x=a\sinh t[/itex].

Daniel.
 
Why are trigonometry substitutions the key, do I just need to accept that?
 
lazypast said:
Why are trigonometry substitutions the key, do I just need to accept that?
Trigonometric substitutions are just special cases of the technique of integration by substitution. The idea behind integration is that you chose a substitution that would simplify your integral to such an extent that you can perform the integral; it is equivalent to the chain rule in differentiation. It simply turns out that trigonometric substitutions are particularly good at simplifying integrals. For example if you had something of the form;

[tex]I = \int \frac{dx}{\sqrt{a-ax^2}}[/tex]

You would use the substitution [itex]x = \sin\theta[/itex] since when you substitute you would obtain something significantly simpler, can you see why?. Once you've done a few integrals, you get a feel for which substitutions to use.
 
Last edited:
number 2

[tex] x = atan \theta , a^2 + x^2 = a^2 + a^2 tan^2 \theta[/tex]

[tex] common factor of a^2, a^2(1 + tan^2 \theta)[/tex]

is there an identity for this?
 
Last edited:
Yes, there is as a matter of fact;

[tex]1+\tan^2\theta = \sec^2\theta[/tex]
 
lazypast said:
Why are trigonometry substitutions the key, do I just need to accept that?
From [itex]sin^2 \theta + cos^2 \theta= 1[/itex] we can derive:

[tex]cos^2 \theta= 1- sin^2 \theta[/tex]
[tex]sec^2 \theta= 1+ tan^2 \theta[/tex]
[tex]tan^2 \theta= sec^2 \theta - 1[/tex]
So if you have something involving
[tex]\sqrt{1- x^2}[/tex]
[tex]\sqrt{1+ x^2}[/tex]
[tex]\sqrt{x^2- 1}[/tex]
The substitution [itex]sin \theta= x[/itex], [itex]tan \theta= x[/itex], or [itex]sec \theta = x[/itex] will put a single square inside the square root, getting rid of the square root.

As dextercioby pointed out, for hyperbolic functions, we have the identity [itex]cosh^2 x- sinh^2 x= 1[/itex] so
[tex]cosh^2 x= 1+ sinh^2 x[/tex]
[tex]sech^2 x= tanh^2- 1 x[/tex]
[tex]tanh^2 x= 1- sech^2 x[/tex]
so the hyperbolic functions can be used similarly.
 
  • #10
Always write 'dx' in your integral. It made you forget to differentiate the substitited x = ... and plug it into the integral.
 
  • #11
The previewing drives me up the wall :[


[tex]\int \frac {1} {{(x^2 - a^2)}^{0.5}} sub-x^2=a^2sec^2 \theta[/tex]

[tex]\int \frac {1} {((a^2sec^2 \theta) - a^2)^{0.5}}[/tex]

[tex]\int \frac {1} {(a^2(sec^2 \theta - 1))^{0.5}}[/tex]

[tex]\int \frac {1} {(a^2 tan^2 \theta)^{0.5}}[/tex]

I assume the square and square root cancel out, but don't know where to go after this, I am guessin integrate?
 
  • #12
Once again, your integrals without the differential form 'dx' represent nothing.
 
  • #13
You end up with [tex]\frac{1}{a}\int \frac{1}{\tan\theta} a\sec \theta \tan \theta[/tex]
 
  • #14
I cannot see how to go from mine to yours courtrigrad, I understand the 1/a but not the rest
 
  • #15
[tex]\int \frac{1}{\sqrt{a^{2}\tan^{2}\theta}}\; dx = \int \frac{1}{a\tan \theta}\; dx = \frac{1}{a} \int \frac{1}{\tan\theta} \; dx[/tex]

where [tex]dx = a\sec \theta \tan \theta[/tex]
 
  • #16
You don't need trig sub for these, there's a much easier way for say, number 2. Remember he wants a proof, not a derivation. Just differentiate the right side, and if you get the same integral it's proven.

[tex]y= arc tan (x)[/tex]
then [tex]x=tan (y)[/tex]
[tex]\frac {dx}{dy} = sec^2 y[/tex] (proven by using quotient rule, letting u= sin y and v= cos y)
[tex](sec^2 y) = 1 + tan^2 y[/tex]
[tex]\frac {dx}{dy} = 1 + tan^2 y[/tex]

Remember [tex]tan (y) = x[/tex]

[tex]\frac {dx}{dy} = 1 + x^2[/tex] then reciprocal both sides

Therefore [tex]\frac {d}{dx} arc tan (x) = \frac {1}{1+x^2}[/tex]

Now that we know that, we shall prove your integral with The Fundamental theorem of Calculus, damn i love it.

[tex] \int \frac {1} {x^2 + a^2} dx [/tex]

From the denominator, take out the factor of [tex]a^2[/tex]. Now it's: [tex] \int \frac {1} {a^2 (1+\frac {x} {a})^2} dx [/tex]

We can take out the [tex]\frac {1}{a^2}[/tex] but just take out [tex]\frac {1}{a}[/tex] and leave the other [tex]\frac {1}{a}[/tex] inside, trust me.

Now, inside the integral we have [tex]\frac {x}{a}[/tex]. Let it equal [tex]u[/tex]

[tex]u= \frac {x}{a}[/tex]
[tex]\frac {du}{dx} = \frac {1}{a}[/tex]

Sub the [tex]\frac {du}{dx}[/tex] for [tex]\frac {1}{a}[/tex] and the [tex]u[/tex] for [tex]\frac {x}{a}[/tex] in our previous integral, we get:

[tex]\frac {1}{a} \int \frac {1}{1+u^2} \frac {du}{dx} dx[/tex]

The [tex]dx[/tex] 's cancel out, so we are left with:
[tex]\frac {1}{a} \int \frac {1}{1+u^2} du[/tex]

We know already that [tex]\int \frac {1}{1+u^2} du= arc tan (u) + C[/tex], so we solve and get:

[tex]\frac {1}{a} arc tan (u) + C[/tex]

Sub back in [tex]\frac {x}{a}[/tex] for [tex]u[/tex], we finally prove that your second integral equals :

[tex]\frac {1}{a} arc tan (\frac {x}{a}) + C[/tex] as required. Hope i helped. Btw I finally got the hang of laTex :D
 
Last edited:
  • #17
That couldn't have answer my question better thanks Gib, now it just need to sink in for me.
 
  • #18
No Problem mate, any more help i gtg now but ill be back tomoro.

and...

Hootenanny said:
It simply turns out that trigonometric substitutions are particularly good at simplifying integrals. For example if you had something of the form;

[tex]I = \int \frac{dx}{\sqrt{a-ax^2}}[/tex]

You would use the substitution [itex]x = \sin\theta[/itex] since when you substitute you would obtain something significantly simpler, can you see why?. Once you've done a few integrals, you get a feel for which substitutions to use.

well actually I would just take out the [itex]a^\frac {-1}{2}[/itex] to leave me with an integral I know is [itex]arcsin (x) + C[/itex]. Took what, 5 seconds? Much simpler if you remember a few integrals. O btw if anyone is wondering, what I just said can be proven in a similar fashion to what i just did a second ago, by changing [itex]arcsin (x) = y[/itex] to [itex]\sin (x) = y[/itex], differentiating, finding the recipricol. aww heck ill just do it here, but won't both with tex...

y= arc sin x
x= sin y

dx/dy= cos y (hopefully you know this ones proof at least..)

Now since we only define arc sin in the domain -pi/2 to pi/2 (otherwise with no domain there are an infinite number of solutions for each valid x).

Anyway you may recognize to domain i set to be the 1st and 4th quadrants, where cos is positive. In these quadrants, cos y = +(1-sin^2 y)^0.5.

remember sin y = x? cos y= (1-x^2)^0.5

recipricol to be dy/dx = 1/ (1-x^2)^0.5 , as required.
 
Last edited:
  • #19
nice job Gib Z.
 

Similar threads

  • · Replies 14 ·
Replies
14
Views
4K
  • · Replies 2 ·
Replies
2
Views
2K
  • · Replies 6 ·
Replies
6
Views
3K
  • · Replies 4 ·
Replies
4
Views
3K
  • · Replies 3 ·
Replies
3
Views
3K
  • · Replies 3 ·
Replies
3
Views
3K
  • · Replies 5 ·
Replies
5
Views
2K
  • · Replies 6 ·
Replies
6
Views
2K
  • · Replies 8 ·
Replies
8
Views
4K
  • · Replies 6 ·
Replies
6
Views
3K