The Fundamental Theorem of Calculus

Click For Summary

Discussion Overview

The discussion revolves around the validity of an argument related to the Fundamental Theorem of Calculus, particularly focusing on the interpretation of infinitesimals in the context of integration and differentiation. Participants explore the implications of treating integrals and their infinitesimal components, questioning the rigor of the initial argument presented.

Discussion Character

  • Debate/contested
  • Conceptual clarification
  • Mathematical reasoning

Main Points Raised

  • One participant proposes that an arbitrary function f(x) can be represented as an infinitesimal area, leading to the argument that the differential of the integral corresponds to the function itself.
  • Another participant counters that if f(x) is arbitrary, there is no guarantee that its integral is differentiable, citing trivial examples that demonstrate this point.
  • A participant attempts to clarify that they are not differentiating the integral but rather discussing infinitesimal parts of it, questioning the validity of their reasoning under the assumption that both f(x) and its integral are differentiable.
  • Concerns are raised about the mathematical meaning of concatenating a 'd' to quantities, with some participants expressing skepticism about the validity of equating the integral with sums of infinitesimals.
  • One participant suggests that if f(x) is Riemann integrable, the integral is obtained through the limit of Riemann sums rather than by summing infinitesimals.

Areas of Agreement / Disagreement

Participants express disagreement regarding the validity of the initial argument and the interpretation of infinitesimals in calculus. There is no consensus on the rigor of the proposed reasoning or the nature of the relationship between integrals and infinitesimals.

Contextual Notes

Participants highlight limitations in the argument's assumptions, particularly regarding the differentiability of arbitrary functions and the interpretation of infinitesimals in mathematical terms.

dx
Homework Helper
Messages
2,143
Reaction score
52
Id like to know if the following argument is valid.
Take an arbitrary function [tex]f(x)[/tex]. [tex]f(x)dx[/tex] can be thought of an infinitesimal area of a certain form (I emphasise this because I use it later in the argument) determined by the form of the function [tex]f(x)[/tex]. Let's denote its integral by [tex]Y[/tex].

[tex]\int{ f(x)} dx = Y[/tex]

Now, I argue that an infinitesimal of the whole formed by summing up infinitesimals of a certain form must be an infinitesimal of the same form. ie,

[tex]d\int{ f(x)} dx = f(x)dx[/tex]

Then the fundamental theorem of calculus follows.

[tex]f(x) dx = dY[/tex]

[tex]f(x) = \frac{dY}{dx}[/tex]

[tex]f(x) = \frac{d}{dx}\int{ f(x)} dx[/tex]

If this argument is valid. Can it be made rigorous?
 
Physics news on Phys.org
No, it is not valid. If f is arbitary there is no reason for its integral to be differentiable, and indeed trivial examples prove this.
 
But I am not differentiating it. I am just saying that I am taking an infinitesimal part of [tex]Y[/tex]. Any way, let's say both f(x) and its integral are differentiable. Then is it valid?

EDIT : even if it is not completely valid, is it atleast an argument that suggests the fundamental theorem of calculus? I am talking about his particular statement.

"Now, I argue that an infinitesimal of the whole formed by summing up infinitesimals of a certain form must be an infinitesimal of the same form."

Is it ok to think this way, or is there something really really wrong with the way I understand it?
 
Last edited:
dx said:
But I am not differentiating it.

By it we are referring to the integral, and you are definitely differentiating that.


As for the rest, I struggle to decipher the words that have necessary meaning mathematically.
 
Im trying to say that when you concatenate a 'd' on the left side of some quantity, you are making it an infinitesimal. So, we have an integral which is summing up infinitesimal quantities. So, in a way, the integral in made up of infinitesimals of a certain form ([tex]x^{2}dx[/tex],or [tex]e^{x}dx[/tex] etc.) When you concatenate a d to the integral, you are undoing the summing up and getting back the infinitesimal that you originally summed up. so [tex]d\int{f(x)}dx = f(x)dx[/tex].
 
dx said:
Im trying to say that when you concatenate a 'd' on the left side of some quantity, you are making it an infinitesimal.

you might be, I'm not sure the rest of mathematics would support that view in the way you wish it to.
So, we have an integral which is summing up infinitesimal quantities.

no, we don't, not really, you're conflating an analogy with the actual thing itself

So, in a way, the integral in made up of infinitesimals of a certain form

again, no it isn't.

([tex]x^{2}dx[/tex],or [tex]e^{x}dx[/tex] etc.) When you concatenate a d to the integral, you are undoing the summing up and getting back the infinitesimal that you originally summed up.

no you're not.
 
Let's say that f(x) is Riemann integrable, ok? EDIT: In some interval (a,b)

You take the limit of a Riemann sum to obtain its integral, with all that this implies, not by summing up 'infinitesimals of certain form'.
 
Last edited:
ok, thanks.
 

Similar threads

  • · Replies 11 ·
Replies
11
Views
2K
  • · Replies 9 ·
Replies
9
Views
2K
  • · Replies 2 ·
Replies
2
Views
2K
  • · Replies 6 ·
Replies
6
Views
3K
  • · Replies 4 ·
Replies
4
Views
3K
  • · Replies 1 ·
Replies
1
Views
3K
  • · Replies 14 ·
Replies
14
Views
3K
  • · Replies 6 ·
Replies
6
Views
2K
  • · Replies 4 ·
Replies
4
Views
2K
  • · Replies 2 ·
Replies
2
Views
3K