On the Simpson's Rule wikipedia page they mention in their derivation that the calculation can be simplified if one notices that there is no loss in generality in setting ##a=-1## and ##b=1## for the integral ##\int_{a}^{b}P(x)\cdot dx## as a result of scaling.(adsbygoogle = window.adsbygoogle || []).push({});

I'm not entirely sure what they're referring to by scaling but if I had to guess it would be applying Simpson's rule to ##n## sub-intervals. I'm also thrown off by the fact that any odd function will just be 0 over this interval whereas over an asymmetric interval it would in general not be 0 yet somehow this is all valid.

**Physics Forums - The Fusion of Science and Community**

Join Physics Forums Today!

The friendliest, high quality science and math community on the planet! Everyone who loves science is here!

The friendliest, high quality science and math community on the planet! Everyone who loves science is here!

# I Why can we WLOG derive Simpson's rule over interval -1 to 1

Tags:

Have something to add?

Draft saved
Draft deleted

Loading...

Similar Threads - WLOG derive Simpson's | Date |
---|---|

I Derivative and Parameterisation of a Contour Integral | Feb 7, 2018 |

I Why does this concavity function not work for this polar fun | Jan 26, 2018 |

I Euler Lagrange formula with higher derivatives | Jan 24, 2018 |

I Derivative of infinitesimal value | Jan 15, 2018 |

Simpson's Rule with negative values | Aug 19, 2014 |

**Physics Forums - The Fusion of Science and Community**