Second fundamental theorem of calculus.

Click For Summary

Homework Help Overview

The discussion revolves around the second fundamental theorem of calculus, specifically examining the differentiation of integrals with variable limits. The original poster poses questions regarding the validity of certain expressions and the evaluation of integrals with reversed bounds.

Discussion Character

  • Conceptual clarification, Mathematical reasoning

Approaches and Questions Raised

  • The original poster questions the correctness of differentiating an integral with reversed bounds and seeks clarification on the implications of this reversal. Participants explore the relationship between the bounds and the resulting sign changes in the integral's evaluation.

Discussion Status

Participants are actively engaging with the questions posed, providing insights into the implications of reversing integral bounds and discussing definitions related to the exterior derivative. There is an ongoing exploration of the concepts without a clear consensus on the original poster's questions.

Contextual Notes

Some participants express uncertainty about terminology, such as the meaning of "modulo," indicating a potential gap in understanding that is being addressed through the discussion.

operationsres
Messages
99
Reaction score
0
Let f(x) be a non-stochastic mapping f: \mathbb{R} \to \mathbb{R}. The second fundamental theorem of calculus states that:

\frac{d}{dx} \int_a^x f(s)ds = f(x).
*QUESTION 1* Is the following true?

\frac{d}{dx} \int_x^a f(s)ds = f(x).

*QUESTION 2* Related to this, how can I evaluate/simplify/express:

d\int_x^a f(s)ds.
 
Physics news on Phys.org
For the first question, what happens to the integral when you reverse the bounds on integration? This should tell you that your answer is not quite correct, modulo only a sign error.

The next answer depends on your context and there are a few ways to do this. The first is to simply use the definition of the exterior derivative. Assuming you are just working on \mathbb R you have that for any function (0-form) F, then in a coordinate chart you have
dF = \frac{\partial F}{\partial x} dx.
Alternatively, if you let \gamma: [0,1] \to \mathbb R be a smooth path such that \gamma(0) = a, \gamma'(0) = v then
d_a F(v) = \left. \frac{d}{dt} \right|_{t=0} (F \circ \gamma).
Both will give you the same solution, the the latter is coordinate independent.
 
Last edited by a moderator:
Kreizhn said:
For the first question, what happens to the integral when you reverse the bounds on integration? This should tell you that your answer is not quite correct, modulo only a sign error.

The next answer depends on your context and there are a few ways to do this. The first is to simply use the definition of the exterior derivative. Assuming you are just working on \mathbb R you have that for any function (0-form) F, then in a coordinate chart you have
dF = \frac{\partial F}{\partial x} dx.
Alternatively, if you let \gamma: [0,1] \to \mathbb R be a smooth path such that \gamma(0) = a, \gamma'(0) = v then
d_a F(v) = \left. \frac d{dt} \right|_{t=0} (F\circ \gamma).
Both will give you the same solution, the the latter is coordinate independent.

Hi,

I'm not sure what "modulo" means?

It would make sense if the solution to QUESTION1 is actually -f(x), is that what you were saying?
 
"modulo a sign error" meant "correct except possibly a sign error".

Yes, \int_x^a f(t)dt= -\int_a^x f(t)dt and then apply the fundamental theorem.
 

Similar threads

  • · Replies 12 ·
Replies
12
Views
2K
Replies
5
Views
2K
Replies
6
Views
3K
  • · Replies 4 ·
Replies
4
Views
2K
  • · Replies 7 ·
Replies
7
Views
3K
  • · Replies 15 ·
Replies
15
Views
2K
  • · Replies 6 ·
Replies
6
Views
3K
  • · Replies 13 ·
Replies
13
Views
1K
Replies
1
Views
2K
  • · Replies 6 ·
Replies
6
Views
3K