I Why Is the Integral Result 175/3 Instead of 45?

  • I
  • Thread starter Thread starter homeworkhelpls
  • Start date Start date
  • Tags Tags
    Area Curve
AI Thread Summary
The integral of y, expressed as (1/3)x^3 + 2x, evaluated from the upper limit of 5 to the lower limit of 2, yields a result of 45, not 175/3. The correct evaluation of 175/3 occurs if the lower limit is set at x=-2. Participants suspect a possible typo or calculation error by the question setter. Additionally, there is a notation clarification suggesting that (1/3)x^3 should be used to avoid confusion with 1/(3x^3). This discussion highlights the importance of precise notation in mathematical expressions.
homeworkhelpls
Messages
41
Reaction score
1
1675365471735.png

i integrated y to get (1/3x^3 + 2x) with upper limit 5 / lower limit 2 but got 45 not 175 / 3
 
Last edited by a moderator:
Mathematics news on Phys.org
homeworkhelpls said:
View attachment 321610
i integrated y to get (1/3x^3 + 2x) with upper limit 5 / lower limit 2 but got 45 not 175 / 3
Both Wolfram Alpha and I agree with you.
 
  • Like
Likes homeworkhelpls and topsquark
Me too!
 
  • Like
Likes homeworkhelpls
The integral would evaluate to 175/3 if the lower limit were x=-2. I suspect a silly typo or calculation slip by the question setter.
 
Last edited:
  • Informative
  • Like
Likes homeworkhelpls and PeroK
homeworkhelpls said:
View attachment 321610
i integrated y to get (1/3x^3 + 2x) with upper limit 5 / lower limit 2 but got 45 not 175 / 3
Just a notation tip. 1/3x^3 can be misread as 1/(3x^3) placing the x^3 in the denominator. To be precise, we can instead write (1/3)x^3 to ensure x^3 is in the numerator and not mistakenly placed in the denominator.
 
Seemingly by some mathematical coincidence, a hexagon of sides 2,2,7,7, 11, and 11 can be inscribed in a circle of radius 7. The other day I saw a math problem on line, which they said came from a Polish Olympiad, where you compute the length x of the 3rd side which is the same as the radius, so that the sides of length 2,x, and 11 are inscribed on the arc of a semi-circle. The law of cosines applied twice gives the answer for x of exactly 7, but the arithmetic is so complex that the...
Thread 'Video on imaginary numbers and some queries'
Hi, I was watching the following video. I found some points confusing. Could you please help me to understand the gaps? Thanks, in advance! Question 1: Around 4:22, the video says the following. So for those mathematicians, negative numbers didn't exist. You could subtract, that is find the difference between two positive quantities, but you couldn't have a negative answer or negative coefficients. Mathematicians were so averse to negative numbers that there was no single quadratic...
Thread 'Unit Circle Double Angle Derivations'
Here I made a terrible mistake of assuming this to be an equilateral triangle and set 2sinx=1 => x=pi/6. Although this did derive the double angle formulas it also led into a terrible mess trying to find all the combinations of sides. I must have been tired and just assumed 6x=180 and 2sinx=1. By that time, I was so mindset that I nearly scolded a person for even saying 90-x. I wonder if this is a case of biased observation that seeks to dis credit me like Jesus of Nazareth since in reality...
Back
Top