Can You Use Simple Substitution for Tricky Integrals?

  • Thread starter Thread starter climbhi
  • Start date Start date
  • Tags Tags
    Integration
AI Thread Summary
Using simple substitution for tricky integrals can lead to errors if the derivative does not match the integrand. A proposed substitution of u = sin^5(x)/5 for the integral of cos^4(x) is incorrect, as the derivative yields sin^4(x)cos(x) instead. This highlights the importance of understanding the chain rule and the limitations of substitution techniques, especially with trigonometric functions. Review of derivative concepts is recommended for verifying integrals. Mistakes in integration can happen, especially under exam pressure, but learning from them is crucial for improvement.
climbhi
If you had say ∫cos4(x)dx according to my integration table in calc book this would be something nasty. Could you not say let u = sin5(x)/5 therefore du = cos4(x)dx and then ∫du = u = sin5(x)/5 + C. Is there something wrong with this. This technique would work on ∫x2 if you said let u = x3/3 and then did everything else the same except there its not quite so tricky. I guess what I'm asking is if you're good at designing a function that when differentiated would give the funtion in the integral can you use my method there instead of the tables which give this nasty formula: ∫cosn(x)dx = [(cosn-1x)(sinx)]/n + [(n-1)/n]∫cosn-2(x)dx
 
Mathematics news on Phys.org
The problem with what you are trying to say is that your basis is totally false. The derivative of 1/5 sin^5(x) is not cos^4(x), but sin^4(x)cos(x). This is by the chain rule. You should remember that the reason why substitution eists is precisely because not everything can be treated as simply x and certainly not trig functions! I think it would be good for you to review how to do derivatives, and if you're stuck and want to check the answer for an integral, try and derive it first to get back to the original equation you just integrated. This way you're sure it's right, and derivatives are safer to do than integrals usually.
 
[beats self relentelessly on head] Oh man I feel soo stupid, I cannot believe I missed that! I knew it was way to easy that way. I can't even describe how stupid I feel looking over that. Ohh well what can you do?[/end self beating blushing terribly]
 
Don't worry about that, i did much worse in an exam situation:
I was extremely stressed because the exam was simply too long, as i rushed in the last question, i accidentaly derived instead of integrating, in an eletric field question. Just image how ashamed i was when i got my paper back. The teacher thought i was a total idiot, even though he was forced to change his mind later on when my average got back above 90%.
 
Thread 'Video on imaginary numbers and some queries'
Hi, I was watching the following video. I found some points confusing. Could you please help me to understand the gaps? Thanks, in advance! Question 1: Around 4:22, the video says the following. So for those mathematicians, negative numbers didn't exist. You could subtract, that is find the difference between two positive quantities, but you couldn't have a negative answer or negative coefficients. Mathematicians were so averse to negative numbers that there was no single quadratic...
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...
Thread 'Unit Circle Double Angle Derivations'
Here I made a terrible mistake of assuming this to be an equilateral triangle and set 2sinx=1 => x=pi/6. Although this did derive the double angle formulas it also led into a terrible mess trying to find all the combinations of sides. I must have been tired and just assumed 6x=180 and 2sinx=1. By that time, I was so mindset that I nearly scolded a person for even saying 90-x. I wonder if this is a case of biased observation that seeks to dis credit me like Jesus of Nazareth since in reality...

Similar threads

Replies
3
Views
2K
Replies
15
Views
2K
Replies
6
Views
3K
Replies
12
Views
2K
Replies
22
Views
3K
Replies
8
Views
2K
Back
Top