Quick question on integration by parts

Click For Summary

Homework Help Overview

The discussion revolves around the application of integration by parts, specifically addressing a step in the process that involves a factor of 2. Participants are examining the manipulation of integrals and the relationships between them as presented in a textbook example.

Discussion Character

  • Exploratory, Mathematical reasoning, Assumption checking

Approaches and Questions Raised

  • Participants are questioning the disappearance of a factor of 2 in the integration process. There is discussion about the original integral appearing on both sides of the equation and how that affects the overall solution. Some participants express confusion about the relationships between the integrals involved.

Discussion Status

There is an active exploration of the integration by parts method, with participants clarifying their understanding of the steps involved. Some have identified potential errors in their reasoning, while others are attempting to reconcile their approaches with the textbook example. A participant has indicated that they resolved their confusion regarding the integral manipulation.

Contextual Notes

Participants are working within the constraints of a homework assignment, which may limit the information they can share or the methods they can use. There is an emphasis on ensuring that the steps taken align with the established formula for integration by parts.

t_n_p
Messages
593
Reaction score
0

Homework Statement


I'm following an example in the textbook that states:

http://img24.imageshack.us/img24/1672/33686252.jpg

I was just wondering what happened to the 2 out the front, I would have been more inclined to think this would be the next step:

http://img34.imageshack.us/img34/4854/a1aa.jpg

Any explanations?
 
Last edited by a moderator:
Physics news on Phys.org
when you perform the integration by parts you get the original integral on both sides of the equation, which leads to the cancelling of the factor of 2 on the right hand side
 
I'm not following 100%.
The integral on the RHS is not the original integral on the LHS?

This it the formula I used (and I am familar with):
05fdc1c25e10bae02245a3334d109965.png

(of course with respect to t here not x)

fyi: I let f = Gsintcost and g' = Gdot

everything works out fine, its just the 2 that has me puzzled
 
ok so in some bastardised short hand

du = G'
u = G
v = Gsc
dv = G'sc + G(c2 - s2)

\int du.v = uv| - \int u.dv

\int G'.Gsc = G.Gsc| - \int G.(G'sc + G(c^2-s^2))

\int G'.Gsc = G^2 sc| - \int G.G'sc -\int G^2(c^2-s^2)

2 \int G'.Gsc = G^2 sc| - \int G^2(c^2-s^2)

2 \int G'.Gsc = G^2 sc| + \int G^2(s^2-c^2)
 
Last edited:
I think dv should be dv = G'sc + G(c^2 - s^2)
 
Last edited:
yeah i think you're right, but hopefully the bit about the orginal intergal aappearing on the RHS is celar
 
lanedance said:
yeah i think you're right, but hopefully the bit about the orginal intergal aappearing on the RHS is celar

bugger, I think dv = G'sc + G(c^2 - s^2), but then if I change that, then I don't get the correct answer!

I understand what you mean by the original integral showing up on the RHS (cos now I can take it over to the lhs and get 2* original integral).


edit: found the mistake. When I broke up the integral I forgot to take the minus inside both.

got it all sorted now.

Cheers!
 
no worries - i updated the working above as well
 

Similar threads

  • · Replies 15 ·
Replies
15
Views
2K
  • · Replies 3 ·
Replies
3
Views
2K
  • · Replies 2 ·
Replies
2
Views
3K
  • · Replies 3 ·
Replies
3
Views
5K
Replies
12
Views
3K
Replies
3
Views
2K
  • · Replies 1 ·
Replies
1
Views
1K
  • · Replies 8 ·
Replies
8
Views
2K
  • · Replies 2 ·
Replies
2
Views
3K
  • · Replies 14 ·
Replies
14
Views
4K