Why are integrals well defined?

  • Thread starter Thread starter jamesbob
  • Start date Start date
Click For Summary

Homework Help Overview

The discussion revolves around the concept of integrals, particularly improper integrals, and their definitions. The original poster expresses confusion about why certain integrals are considered well-defined, using a specific example involving an integral from zero to infinity.

Discussion Character

  • Conceptual clarification, Assumption checking

Approaches and Questions Raised

  • Participants explore the meaning of "well-defined" in the context of integrals, questioning the original poster's phrasing and conclusions. There are discussions about applying the definition of improper integrals and evaluating limits.

Discussion Status

The discussion includes attempts to clarify the original poster's understanding of improper integrals, with some participants providing insights into how to approach the evaluation of such integrals. There is acknowledgment of confusion stemming from the university's explanations.

Contextual Notes

Participants note the original poster's struggle with the terminology and definitions used in their coursework, indicating a potential gap in understanding the foundational concepts of improper integrals.

jamesbob
Messages
63
Reaction score
0
Im having trouble explaining why intergrals are well defined. For instance:

[tex]\int_{0}^{\infty} \frac{1}{(x + 16)^{\frac{5}{4}}}dx.[/tex]

Here do i say something like:

[tex]\mbox{The integral behaves at zero, and at } \infty, (x + 16)^{\frac{5}{4}} > x^{\frac{5}{4}} \mbox{ therefore the integral diverges.}[/tex]
 
Last edited:
Physics news on Phys.org
Your sentence is, essentially meaningless:
"The integral behaves at zero" :confused:

Besides, your conclusion is wrong.
 
It depends on what you mean by "well-defined". If you mean "is a real number" then look at what happens when you apply the definition of the improper integral to what you have, and show that you really do get a real number.
 
Actually, the value of your integral equals a most special prime.
 
jamesbob said:
Im having trouble explaining why intergrals are well defined. For instance:

[tex]\int_{0}^{\infty} \frac{1}{(x + 16)^{\frac{5}{4}}}dx.[/tex]

Here do i say something like:

[tex]\mbox{The integral behaves at zero, and at } \infty, (x + 16)^{\frac{5}{4}} > x^{\frac{5}{4}} \mbox{ therefore the integral diverges.}[/tex]
No, it does not make sense. This is an Improper integral. As you know:
[tex]\mathop {\int} \limits ^ {b}_{a} f(x) dx = F(b) - F(a)[/tex], so what if b is not finite, i.e b tends to infinity? We have:
[tex]\mathop {\int} \limits ^ {\infty}_{a} f(x) dx = \lim_{b \rightarrow \infty} \mathop {\int} \limits ^ {b}_{a} f(x) dx = \lim_{b \rightarrow \infty}(F(b)) - F(a)[/tex]
-----------
Say you want to evaluate:
[tex]\mathop {\int} \limits ^ {\infty}_{1} \frac{dx}{x ^ 2}[/tex]
We have:
[tex]\mathop {\int} \limits ^ {\infty}_{1} \frac{dx}{x ^ 2} = \left( \lim_{x \rightarrow \infty} - \frac{1}{x} \right) + \frac{1}{1} = 1[/tex].
Can you get this? :)
 
Yeah, thanks. Its just the way my silly university asks questions and explains things that confused me. Thanks for the help :smile:
 

Similar threads

  • · Replies 6 ·
Replies
6
Views
2K
Replies
4
Views
3K
  • · Replies 5 ·
Replies
5
Views
3K
  • · Replies 6 ·
Replies
6
Views
2K
  • · Replies 9 ·
Replies
9
Views
2K
  • · Replies 8 ·
Replies
8
Views
2K
  • · Replies 47 ·
2
Replies
47
Views
5K
Replies
6
Views
3K
  • · Replies 14 ·
Replies
14
Views
2K
  • · Replies 2 ·
Replies
2
Views
2K