Why does my TI-89 give an incorrect result for this integration problem?

Click For Summary

Discussion Overview

The discussion revolves around a discrepancy in the results obtained from a TI-89 calculator for the integral I = ∫₀^π (3cos²(t) - 1)sin²(t) dt. Participants explore the potential reasons for the calculator's output of zero, contrasting it with the expected result of -π/8, which has been verified by hand and using Mathematica.

Discussion Character

  • Debate/contested
  • Technical explanation
  • Mathematical reasoning

Main Points Raised

  • One participant asserts that their TI-89 Titanium gives an incorrect result of zero for the integral, while they believe the correct answer is -π/8.
  • Another participant suggests the possibility of the calculator being set to degrees instead of radians, which could lead to rounding errors.
  • A participant shares the indefinite integral result provided by their calculator, which differs from the expected form, raising concerns about its correctness upon differentiation.
  • Some participants note similarities in the forms of the expressions produced by different calculators, indicating potential underlying relationships.
  • One participant questions whether others can reproduce the error, seeking validation of the issue.
  • Another participant argues that expressions do not need to appear identical to be equivalent, suggesting that the discrepancy might not indicate an error.
  • A participant reports their own TI-89 yielding -π/8 for the definite integral and provides their version information, prompting a discussion about potential differences in calculator models.
  • One participant mentions that the modular term produced by their calculator is equivalent to -t/8 in certain regions, indicating a possible source of the discrepancy.
  • A participant notes that the periodic nature of the function could lead to the calculator returning zero for the definite integral due to discontinuities in the indefinite integral.

Areas of Agreement / Disagreement

Participants express differing results from their calculators, with some obtaining -π/8 and others zero. There is no consensus on the cause of the discrepancy, and multiple competing views remain regarding the behavior of the calculators and the nature of the integral.

Contextual Notes

Participants mention potential issues with calculator settings, the nature of the integrand, and the implications of periodicity and discontinuity in the results. These factors contribute to the complexity of the discussion without resolving the underlying discrepancies.

musemonkey
Messages
23
Reaction score
0
The integral is

I = \int_0^\pi (~3\cos^2(t) - 1~)\sin^2(t)~dt.

My TI-89 Titanium says I = 0, but I know the answer (verified by hand and by mathematica) to be -\pi / 8. I am 100% sure I entered it correctly into the calculator. What gives?
 
Computer science news on Phys.org
If you take pi degrees as the integration boundary, the result is very small. Are you sure you don't have it set to degrees and it's rounding off that small result to zero?
Are you sure you are entering the formula with X instead of T (and T happens to be equal to zero)?
 
No I'm in radians. The indefinite integral result that the calculator gives is

\int (~3\cos^2(t) - 1~)\sin^2(t)~dt = \frac{\sin(t)\cdot\left(6\cdot\sin^2(t)+1\right)\cdot\cos(t)}{8}-\frac{\mod(2t-\pi,2\pi)}{16},

whereas the correct answer is

\int (~3\cos^2(t) - 1~)\sin^2(t)~dt = -\frac{t}{8} + \frac{1}{4}\sin(2t) - \frac{3}{32}\sin(4t).

Differentiating in the calculator the antiderivative that it gives does not give back anything that looks like (~3\cos^2(t) - 1~)\sin^2(t).

weird eh?
 
Cool, in my day :-p we only had the 83+ which could only do integrations numerically.

Anyway, yep, it's weird. I see some similarities, for example sin(t) cos(t) ~ sin(2t) and mod(2t - pi, 2pi) / 16 would be just t/8 for t > pi/2 (and pi + t/8 for t < pi/2), so some terms seem to agree. Perhaps you can check exactly which terms are there and see what goes wrong... or by looking at the form guess how the TI is doing the integration?
 
Well, first, can anyone reproduce this supposed error?
 
musemonkey said:
Differentiating in the calculator the antiderivative that it gives does not give back anything that looks like (~3\cos^2(t) - 1~)\sin^2(t).
So what? Expressions don't have to look the same to be equal...
 
Maybe your TI-89 is broken, or you entered it incorrectly. Mine gives -\pi/8 for the definite integral and
\frac{\sin(t) \cdot \left( 6 (\sin(t))^2 + 1) \cdot \cos(t)}{8} - \frac{t}{8}
for the indefinite integral. Differentiating that gives the following mess:
\left(\frac{9 \cdot (\sin(t))^2}{4} + 1/8 \right) \cdot (\cos(t))^2 - \frac{3 \cdot (\sin(t))^4}{4} - \frac{(sin(t))^2}{8} - 1/8
but subtracting the original integrand from this gives zero. Have you tried that?

Note: my TI-89 (non-Titanium) is HW1, AMS version 2.05, 07/05/2000. What is yours? (If you don't know how to check, at Home, go F1(Tools) - A(About).)
 
Last edited:
OK, that's pretty much what I expected. I'll take a photo of the screen and send it to Texas Instruments.

Differentiating the antiderivative and subtracting the original integrand does give zero. The difference between what your and my calculators are producing is that mine gives a modular term instead of -t/8. Cool, so we've narrowed down the problem. Thanks!
 
Last edited:
Note that the modular term is precisely equal to -t/8 in one part of the integration region, and it is equal to that up to a constant (which is irrelevant for the differentiation of course) in the rest. So it correctly calculates an anti-derivative (just not the one you'd want, if you expected something continuous :smile:).
However, for the definite integration that will give a factor (2 \pi) \times (\pi / 2) too much.
 
  • #10
Some more information: a friend of mine also gets -\pi/8 on his TI-89 Titanium (HW4, AMS 3.10, 07/18/2005).

I'm pretty sure the reason you get zero is because of the discontinuity of the indefinite integral your calculator obtains: what you get is periodic (with period pi), so if you try to obtain the definite integral using that, you will get zero.
 
Last edited:

Similar threads

  • · Replies 5 ·
Replies
5
Views
2K
Replies
1
Views
3K
Replies
1
Views
2K
  • · Replies 5 ·
Replies
5
Views
7K
  • · Replies 1 ·
Replies
1
Views
4K
  • · Replies 3 ·
Replies
3
Views
3K
  • · Replies 5 ·
Replies
5
Views
5K
  • · Replies 1 ·
Replies
1
Views
5K
  • · Replies 2 ·
Replies
2
Views
11K
  • · Replies 3 ·
Replies
3
Views
16K