Calculators TI-89 Titanium INTEGRATION Flaw?

AI Thread Summary
The discussion revolves around an integration issue with the TI-89 calculator, specifically the integral of 1/[G-(Cv)/M] with respect to "v." The expected answer is -(M/C)[ln(G-(Cv)/M)], but the calculator returns -(M/C)[ln(|Cv-GM|)]. The discrepancy arises from the fact that both answers differ only by a constant, which is typical in integration since a constant of integration is often omitted. The calculator's result is correct in the general sense as it accounts for the absolute value in the logarithm, which is important for ensuring the logarithm's argument remains positive. The conversation emphasizes that both answers are valid and highlights the importance of recognizing the constant of integration when comparing results.
Switch_fx
Messages
2
Reaction score
0
TI-89 Titanium INTEGRATION Flaw?

Ok so this is my first post, and I am in dire need of assistance. I have a big exam tomorrow and if I can't figure out why my TI-89 is screwing up this simple integration I am in some trouble...

I am looking for the integral of : 1/[G-(Cv)/M] with respect to "v"

(erroneus, G=gravitational constant, C=drag coefficient, M=mass, and V=velocity)

anyways...
I know the correct answer is : -(M/C)[ln(G-(Cv)/M)]

but my TI-89 calculator gives back the answer as:

-(M/C)[ln(|Cv-GM|)]

If anyone could please explain to me why this is so or what I am doing wrong it would be of great help...and yes I am inputting the integral in the correct fashion

Thanks to anyone who can help!


~SWITCH
 
Computer science news on Phys.org
If you get rid of the fraction in the denominator in the original function you will arrive at the answe your calculator does, however you should notice that these only differ by a constant and that when you integrate you always have to add on a constant of integration.
 
Why would I get rid of the fraction in the denominator? And if I get rid of it what do I replace it with?
 
You asked a question, you got an answer. Read the answer again. By the way, neither your answer nor the calculator's answer is correct!

Both are missing the added constant. d_leet's point is that your and the calculator's answer differ only by a constant.
 
If we leave the constant part, the calculator is right in general, as it gives the absolute value of quantity inside logarithm.
 
Last edited:
Maybe if it's hard for you to integrate 1/(1-ax) with respect to x then you do have a problem?

Taken from 1/a onwards, the integral of 1/1-ax is (-1/a) ln |1-ax|. Knowing how that solve your problem without needing the calculator.
 
Switch_fx said:
Ok so this is my first post, and I am in dire need of assistance. I have a big exam tomorrow and if I can't figure out why my TI-89 is screwing up this simple integration I am in some trouble...

I am looking for the integral of : 1/[G-(Cv)/M] with respect to "v"

(erroneus, G=gravitational constant, C=drag coefficient, M=mass, and V=velocity)

anyways...
I know the correct answer is : -(M/C)[ln(G-(Cv)/M)]

but my TI-89 calculator gives back the answer as:

-(M/C)[ln(|Cv-GM|)]

If anyone could please explain to me why this is so or what I am doing wrong it would be of great help...and yes I am inputting the integral in the correct fashion

Thanks to anyone who can help!


~SWITCH

Take the "correct" answer, and use the logarithmic rule for division: ln(a/b) = ln(a) - ln(b). Normally I'd get in trouble for telling you that, but you could have just as easily looked it up in the textbook, so I thought I'd save you a couple minutes of tedious page turning. Anyway, considering what the others here have told you, just by expanding your answer in this way, you should be convinced that your answer and the 89's answer are the same.
 

Similar threads

Replies
5
Views
2K
Replies
1
Views
5K
Replies
1
Views
5K
Replies
1
Views
16K
Replies
3
Views
3K
Replies
5
Views
5K
Replies
2
Views
7K
Back
Top