MHB Why is the summation in the first part from k=0 to n-1?

Click For Summary
The discussion centers on the evaluation of the integral ∫(4−7x)dx from 1 to 8 and the reasoning behind the summation index from k=0 to n-1 in the left-hand Riemann sum. Participants explore the calculations involved in setting up the integral and discuss the geometric interpretation of the area under the curve. The left-hand sum uses the value of the integrand at the left endpoint of each subinterval, necessitating the summation from k=0 to n-1. Clarifications on the steps and formulas used in the summation process are provided, emphasizing the importance of correctly indexing the summation for accurate results. The conversation concludes with an understanding of how the summation index relates to the partitioning of the interval in the context of Riemann sums.
VikramAhuja
Messages
7
Reaction score
0
∫(4−7x)dx ====> Integral is from 1 to 8

Similar question but for some reason I can't get the answer after following all the steps
 
Physics news on Phys.org
VikramAhuja said:
∫(4−7x)dx ====> Integral is from 1 to 8

Similar question but for some reason I can't get the answer after following all the steps

I have moved your post to its own thread so that the other thread does not become convoluted.

Using a similar argument in my first post of the other thread, we can apply some simple geometry to see that the result should be:

$$I=\int_1^8 4-7x\,dx=-\left(3\cdot7 + \frac{1}{2}7\cdot49\right)=-\frac{385}{2}$$

Now, in setting up the left-hand sum, we may begin with:

$$I_n=\frac{7}{n}\sum_{k=0}^{n-1}\left(4-7\left(1+k\left(\frac{7}{n}\right)\right)\right)$$

Are you with me so far?
 
Yes I've got to (7/n^2)((43n^2-49n)/2)

Apparently it is wrong
 
Okay, my next step would be:

$$I_n=-\frac{7}{n^2}\sum_{k=0}^{n-1}\left(3n+49k\right)$$

And next, I would write:

$$I_n=-\frac{7}{n^2}\left(3n\sum_{k=0}^{n-1}(1)+49\sum_{k=0}^{n-1}(k)\right)$$

Using summation formulas, there results:

$$I_n=-\frac{7}{n^2}\left(3n^2+49\frac{n(n-1)}{2}\right)$$

Now, factor out a $$\frac{n}{2}$$, distribute and combine like terms. What do you find?
 
Nevermind I got it but now with lower sums?
 
Last edited:
VikramAhuja said:
Would the answer be (-7(55*n-49))/(2*n)

Yes, I also get:

$$I_n=-\frac{7(55n-49)}{2n}$$

VikramAhuja said:
How'd you get this? (-7/n^2) ?

We initially had $$-\frac{7}{n}$$ in front of the sum as a factor, and then I factored out $$\frac{1}{n}$$ and then after combining terms, the summand became $3n+49k$.
 
Sorry I edited my post
 
VikramAhuja said:
Nevermind I got it but now with lower sums?

Can you show what you think the sum should initially be?
 
No I'm rather confused with lower sums
 
  • #10
The right-hand sum will simply be:

$$I_n=\frac{7}{n}\sum_{k=1}^{n}\left(4-7\left(1+k\left(\frac{7}{n}\right)\right)\right)$$
 
  • #11
Thanks a lot mate.
 
  • #12
One last question. Why is the summition in the first part sum_{n-1}^{k=0}
 
  • #13
VikramAhuja said:
One last question. Why is the summition in the first part sum_{n-1}^{k=0}

In the left-hand sum, the height of each rectangle is taken to be the integrand's value on the left side of each regular partition, so the index of summation needs to go from $k=0$ to $k=n-1$.

Table.jpg
 

Similar threads

  • · Replies 2 ·
Replies
2
Views
2K
  • · Replies 7 ·
Replies
7
Views
2K
  • · Replies 1 ·
Replies
1
Views
3K
  • · Replies 5 ·
Replies
5
Views
2K
  • · Replies 14 ·
Replies
14
Views
4K
  • · Replies 7 ·
Replies
7
Views
3K
  • · Replies 14 ·
Replies
14
Views
3K
  • · Replies 1 ·
Replies
1
Views
3K
  • · Replies 38 ·
2
Replies
38
Views
7K
  • · Replies 14 ·
Replies
14
Views
2K