Dismiss Notice
Join Physics Forums Today!
The friendliest, high quality science and math community on the planet! Everyone who loves science is here!

Trouble with Riemann sums

  1. Sep 8, 2008 #1
    Alright, I started doing Riemann sums and I am ripping my hair out in frustration. I just can't wrap my head around how I'm supposed to do it, and my woefully vague textbook isn't helping either. I'm wondering how I'm supposed to solve a Riemann sum question with sigma notation (no limits), and with only the width and height of the rectangles provided (no curve function). I used the image as an example. I have absolutely no clue how/why they get the 30 and 27. If anyone could provide a step by step explanation, it would be great. Thanks

    Attached Files:

  2. jcsd
  3. Sep 9, 2008 #2


    User Avatar
    Science Advisor
    Homework Helper

    Welcome to PF!

    Hi guynoone! Welcome to PF! :smile:

    ok … for some reason, the 0th Riemann sum, from 1 to n, is defined as being 1/n times the ∑, and the 1st Riemann sum as 1/n² times ∑.

    In this case, you're expecting 10/3 times the 0th sum, and 1/3 times the 1st, but this particular definition means that you multiply the 0th one by 9, = 10/3 * 9 = 30, and the 1st one by 81, = 81 * 1/3 = 27. :smile:

    (it isn't the only way of working out this problem … it's only really useful if you happen to have tables of Riemann sums :wink:

    personally, i prefer to remember ∑i = n(n+1)/2)
  4. Sep 9, 2008 #3
    Thanks for the answer. To be honest I still don't really get what is happening for the solution I posted, but I just plan on sticking to the ∑i = n(n+1)/2) method which is way better (they must be trying to confuse us on purpose with these identities!)
  5. Sep 20, 2008 #4


    User Avatar
    Homework Helper

    Re: Welcome to PF!

    ''ok … for some reason, the 0th Riemann sum, from 1 to n, is defined as being 1/n times the ∑, and the 1st Riemann sum as 1/n² times ∑.''

    Little abuse of notation here, even though I'm sure tiny-tim understands the entire problem.
    The 0th order term refers to a sum which involves [tex] i^0[/tex], or [tex] 1[/tex], a first order term involves [tex] i^1 = i [/tex], and so on. Writing [tex] \sum [/tex] without any explicit is common, but writing it without any arguments (summands) is not.
    Actually, all that is done in this work a (very poor, in my opinion) condensation of the basic steps.

    \sum_{i=1}^9 {\frac{10-i} 3} & = \frac 1 3 \sum_{i=1}^9 {(10-i)}\\
    & = \frac 1 3 \left(\sum_{i=1}^9 10 - \sum_{i=1}^9 i \right) \\
    & = \frac 1 3 \left( 10 \sum_{i=1}^9 1 - \sum_{i=1}^9 i \right)\\
    & = \frac 1 3 \left(10 \cdot 9 - \frac{10\cdot 9}{2} \right) \\
    & = \frac 1 3 \left(90 - 45\right) = \frac{45}{3} = 15

    Note that the formula

    \sum_{i=1}^n =\frac{n(n+1)} 2

    was used, with [tex] n = 9 [/tex], was used.

    As I indicated at the top of my post, I believe the solution for this problem (the one posted by the OP) is very poorly presented and typeset
Know someone interested in this topic? Share this thread via Reddit, Google+, Twitter, or Facebook

Have something to add?

Similar Discussions: Trouble with Riemann sums
  1. Riemann Sums (Replies: 3)

  2. Riemann sum (Replies: 2)

  3. Riemann Sums (Replies: 5)