Proof of Power Rule (Definite Integral) for Negative Integers

Click For Summary

Homework Help Overview

The discussion revolves around proving the integral formula for negative integers in the context of calculus, specifically focusing on the power rule for definite integrals. The original poster references a problem from a mathematics text and seeks to establish the validity of the integral formula for negative integer values of k.

Discussion Character

  • Exploratory, Conceptual clarification, Problem interpretation

Approaches and Questions Raised

  • The original poster expresses uncertainty about how to incorporate negative integers into the integral expression. They mention a suggestion to use substitution but find it leads back to complications with the condition k ≠ -1.
  • Another participant proposes a change of variable, suggesting that using u = 1/x might be a useful approach for handling negative integers.

Discussion Status

The discussion is ongoing, with participants exploring different methods and ideas to tackle the proof. Some guidance has been offered, but no consensus or resolution has been reached regarding the best approach to take.

Contextual Notes

The original poster indicates that the problem is not a typical homework question but rather a theoretical exploration from a mathematics text. There is a focus on ensuring that the proof aligns with established mathematical models.

DarrenM
Messages
79
Reaction score
1
This is not actually a homework problem. Rather, it is a problem from Courant and Robbins' What is Mathematics?, Chapter 8: "The Calculus", page 409-410.

Homework Statement


Prove that for any rational k =/= -1 the same limit formula, N → k+1, and therefore the result:

∫a to b xk dx = bk+1 - ak+1 / k+1 , k any positive integer

remains valid. First give the proof, according to our model, for negative integers k. ... (There is more, but it's subsequent steps and, since I'm having trouble just getting started, I don't think it's relevant.)

The Attempt at a Solution



I'm not really sure how to get started. That is, I'm not sure how to even introduce "negative integers" into the expression. Someone suggested I try a proof by substitution, allowing j to equal -k, but if k = 2 that takes us right back to the k =/= -1 thing, I think.

A nudge in the right direction would be much appreciated.
 
Physics news on Phys.org
Ok, I've finally figured out how to use the LaTex stuff on this forum. With that accomplished, the entire exercise that I'm currently obsessing over:

Prove that for any rational k[tex]\neq[/tex] -1 the same limit formula, N → k+1, and therefore the result:

[tex]\int_{a}^{b} x^{k} dx = \frac {b^{k+1} - a^{k+1}} {{k+1}}[/tex]

, k any positive integer

remains valid. First give the proof, according to our model, for negative integers k.Then, if [tex]k = \frac {u}{v}[/tex], write [tex]q^{\frac{1}{v}} = s[/tex] and

[tex]N = \frac{s^{k+1} -1}{s^{v} -1} = \frac{s^{u+v} -1}{s^{v} -1} = \frac{s^{u+v} -1}{s -1} / \frac{s^{v} -1}{s -1}[/tex]
 
This was the proof that preceded it:

To obtain the integral formula

[tex] \int_{a}^{b} x^{k} dx = \frac {b^{k+1} - a^{k+1}} {{k+1}} [/tex]

we form [tex]S_{n}[/tex] by choosing the points of subdivision [tex]x_{0} = a, x_{1}, x_{2}, ... , x_{n} = b[/tex] in geometrical progression. We set the [tex]^{n}\sqrt{\frac{b}{a}} = q[/tex] , so that [tex]\frac{b}{a} = q^{n}[/tex] , and define [tex]x_{0} = a, x_{1} = aq, x_{2} = aq², ... , x_{n} = aq^{n} = b[/tex] . By this device, as we shall see, the passage to the limit becomes very easy. For the "rectangle sum" [tex]S_{n}[/tex] we find, since [tex]f(x_{i}) = x^{k}_{i} = a^{k}q^{ik}[/tex], and [tex]\Delta x = x_{i+1} - x_{i} = aq^{i+1} - aq^{i}[/tex],




[tex]S_{n} = a^{k}(aq - a) + a^{k}q^{k}(aq^{2} - aq) +a^{k}q^{2k}(aq^{3} - aq^{2}) + ... + a^{k}q^{k(n-1)}(aq^{n} - aq^{n-1})[/tex] .




Since each term contains the factor [tex]a^{k}(aq - a)[/tex], we may write



[tex]S_{n} = a^{k+1}(q - 1)[1 + q^{k+1} + q^{2(k+1)} + ... + q^{(n-1)(k+1)}][/tex] .



Substituting [tex]t[/tex] for [tex]q^{k+1}[/tex] we see that the expression in braces is the geometrical series [tex]1 + t + t^{2} + ... + t^{(n-1)}[/tex] , whose sum is [tex]\frac{t^{n} - 1}{t -1}[/tex] . But [tex]t^{n} = q^{n(k+1)} = (\frac {b}{a})^{k+1} = \frac{b^{k+1}}{a^{k+1}}[/tex] . Hence,



[tex]S_{n} = (q - 1) [\frac {b^{k+1} - a^{k+1}}{q^{k+1} - 1}] = \frac {b^{k+1} - a^{k+1}}{N}[/tex]

where [tex]N = \frac{q^{k+1} -1}{q -1}[/tex] .



Thus far, n has been a fixed number. Now we shall let n increase, and determine the limit of N. As n increases, the [tex]^{n}\sqrt{\frac{b}{a}} = q[/tex] will tend to 1, and therefore both numerator and denominator of N will tend to zero, which makes caution necessary. Suppose first that k is a positive integer; then the division of q -1 can be carried out, and we obtain [tex]N = q^{k} + q^{k-1} + ... + q + 1[/tex] . If now n increases, q tends to 1 and hence [tex]q^{2}, q^{3}, ... , q^{k}[/tex] will also tend to 1, so that N approaches k+1. But this shows that [tex]S_{n}[/tex] tends to [tex]\frac {b^{k+1} - a^{k+1}} {{k+1}}[/tex] , which was to be proved.
 
I think to go to negative n they want you to do the change of variable u=1/x. Just a hunch.
 

Similar threads

  • · Replies 1 ·
Replies
1
Views
2K
Replies
2
Views
2K
  • · Replies 1 ·
Replies
1
Views
2K
Replies
11
Views
2K
Replies
4
Views
2K
  • · Replies 6 ·
Replies
6
Views
3K
  • · Replies 2 ·
Replies
2
Views
2K
Replies
3
Views
4K
Replies
5
Views
2K
  • · Replies 2 ·
Replies
2
Views
1K