High School Why Do Different Methods Yield Different Results for ∫0 T sin²(ωt) dt?

  • Thread starter Thread starter Const@ntine
  • Start date Start date
  • Tags Tags
    Integral
Click For Summary
SUMMARY

The discussion centers on the integration of the function ∫0 T sin²(ωt) dt and the discrepancies in results obtained from different sources. The user compares their manual integration process with results from Wolfram Alpha and Cymath, ultimately concluding that the correct formulation is 1/T∫0 T sin²(ωt) dt = 1/T(t/2 - sin²ωt/4ω)|T 0. The textbook's version is incorrect due to missing factors in the integration process. The final result confirms that the average value of sin²(ωt) over the interval is 1/2.

PREREQUISITES
  • Understanding of definite integrals and integration techniques
  • Familiarity with trigonometric identities, specifically sin²(x) = 1/2(1 - cos(2x))
  • Knowledge of substitution methods in integration, particularly u-substitution
  • Basic grasp of calculus concepts, including limits and continuity
NEXT STEPS
  • Review integration techniques involving trigonometric functions
  • Study the application of u-substitution in definite integrals
  • Explore the use of Wolfram Alpha for verifying complex integrals
  • Learn about common pitfalls in integration, particularly with trigonometric identities
USEFUL FOR

Students studying calculus, educators teaching integration techniques, and anyone seeking to clarify discrepancies in mathematical proofs involving trigonometric functions.

Const@ntine
Messages
285
Reaction score
18
Hi! I came across a proof in my physics textbook (amperage=wattage/area), and it contained this integration: ∫0 T sin2(ωt) dt

The whole thing: 1/T∫0 T sin2(ωt) dt = 1/T(t/2 + sin2ωt/2ω)|T 0 = 1/2

I didn't remember how to integrate that, so I went back to check my notes, and look at it at Wolfram or some other sites. But the problem is, I get different results. Same for the other sites I checked.

Wolfram: http://www.wolframalpha.com/input/?i=integrate+sin^2(ω*t)

Cymath (it's a simpler form, but the theory is the same): https://www.cymath.com/answer?q=int(sin(x)^2,x)

So I went to try my hand at it:

0 T sin2(ωt) dt

u = ωt <=> du = ωdt
sin2(x) = 1/2 - cos(2x)/2

1/ω∫0 T 1/2 - cos2u/2 du = 1/ω [ ∫0 T1/2 du - ∫0 T cos2u/2 du]

We break that into two integrals:

1/ω∫0 T1/2 du = 1/ω (u/2)|T 0 = 1/ω (ωt/2)|T 0 = T/2

1/ω∫0 T cos2u/2 du

k = 2u <=> dk = 2du

1/ω∫0 T cosk/4 dk = 1/4ω∫0 T cosk dk = 1/4ω(sink)|T 0 = 1/4ω(sin2u)|T 0 = 1/4ω(sin2ωt)|T 0 = sin(2ωT)/4ω

But, ω = 2π/T so sin(2ωT)/4ω = 0

In the end, we have: 1/T*(T/2 - 0) = 1/2

The end result is the same, but I wonder which version is correct:

Book: 1/T∫0 T sin2(ωt) dt = 1/T(t/2 + sin2ωt/2ω)|T 0

Other: 1/T∫0 T sin2(ωt) dt = 1/T(t/2 - sin2ωt/4ω)|T 0

Any help is appreciated!

PS: I know that I also have to change the T & 0 when changing the integrating factor (t, then u, then k), but it's been a few years since I've done that, and have forgotten how exactly, so I justkept them the same and reverted the u & k back to their original t-related forms when the time came to find the end result.
 
Mathematics news on Phys.org
"Other" is correct, as you have shown by your integration. There is a factor of 1/2 that comes from sin2x = 1/2(1-cos2x), and another that comes from ∫-cos2xdx = (sin2x)/2. The book seems to have forgotten one of these.
 
  • Like
Likes Const@ntine
mjc123 said:
"Other" is correct, as you have shown by your integration. There is a factor of 1/2 that comes from sin2x = 1/2(1-cos2x), and another that comes from ∫-cos2xdx = (sin2x)/2. The book seems to have forgotten one of these.
Thanks for the confirmation!
 

Similar threads

  • · Replies 2 ·
Replies
2
Views
2K
  • · Replies 4 ·
Replies
4
Views
4K
  • · Replies 4 ·
Replies
4
Views
2K
  • · Replies 3 ·
Replies
3
Views
2K
  • · Replies 21 ·
Replies
21
Views
3K
  • · Replies 1 ·
Replies
1
Views
1K
Replies
3
Views
2K
Replies
2
Views
7K
Replies
21
Views
2K
  • · Replies 7 ·
Replies
7
Views
3K