Why split interval here? Area under a curve

Click For Summary

Discussion Overview

The discussion revolves around the reasoning for splitting the interval when calculating the area under a curve using integration. Participants explore the implications of different functions defining the area over specific intervals and the necessity of using different approaches based on the behavior of these functions.

Discussion Character

  • Exploratory
  • Technical explanation
  • Conceptual clarification
  • Debate/contested

Main Points Raised

  • Some participants note that the area under the curve can be calculated using the formula A = ∫ab|g(x) - f(x)|dx, but question its applicability when g(x) and f(x) do not maintain a consistent relationship over the entire interval.
  • One participant points out that on the interval [0,1), g(x) is greater than f(x), while on (1,2], f(x) is greater than g(x), suggesting the need to split the integral.
  • Another participant emphasizes that the region is entirely above the x-axis, indicating that there is no need to account for positive and negative areas, but acknowledges the change in the defining function at x=1.
  • There is a discussion about whether a single integration could be used if the area is defined by two functions throughout, with some participants suggesting that it would depend on the specific functions involved.
  • Participants clarify that the area between two functions requires integrating the difference of the two functions, while areas defined by a single function may need separate calculations based on the intervals.

Areas of Agreement / Disagreement

Participants express differing views on when to split the integral and the conditions under which different functions define the area. There is no consensus on a single approach, as the discussion remains unresolved regarding the best method for various scenarios.

Contextual Notes

Participants highlight the importance of identifying the functions being integrated and the specific intervals over which they apply. There are references to different types of areas (e.g., between curves versus above the x-axis) that may require distinct approaches, but the exact conditions and assumptions are not fully resolved.

opus
Gold Member
Messages
717
Reaction score
131
Please see attached image.
When we want to find the area under a curve, we can use the formula
##A = \int_a^b\left|g(x)-f(x)\right|dx## where g(x) is greater than f(x) and both are continuous over the closed interval ##[a,b]##
My text, as seen in the picture, described the area under the curve as a complex region, and says we need to split it up.
What's the reasoning behind this? Does it have something to do with the bounds?
 

Attachments

  • Screen Shot 2018-11-29 at 1.13.18 AM.png
    Screen Shot 2018-11-29 at 1.13.18 AM.png
    9.8 KB · Views: 578
Physics news on Phys.org
I may have noticed a possible reason. On [0,1) ##g(x) > f(x)## and on (1,2] ##f(x) > g(x)##. So I don't think we could use the given formula in this case because a function would need to be greater than the other over the entire interval.
 
opus said:
I may have noticed a possible reason. On [0,1) ##g(x) > f(x)## and on (1,2] ##f(x) > g(x)##. So I don't think we could use the given formula in this case because a function would need to be greater than the other over the entire interval.

The region is entirely above the x-axis, so there is no need to split the integral to account of regions of "positive" and "negative" area. But, the function defining the region changes at ##x=1##. So, you need to integrate one function from 0 to 1 and another function from 1 to 2.

Note that the region is not the difference of two functions.
 
  • Like
Likes   Reactions: opus
PeroK said:
The region is entirely above the x-axis, so there is no need to split the integral to account of regions of "positive" and "negative" area.
I haven't gotten to such a problem but I'll keep this in mind when I do.

PeroK said:
But, the function defining the region changes at x=1x=1. So, you need to integrate one function from 0 to 1 and another function from 1 to 2.
So on [0,1), the function defining the region is the orange one, and from (1,2] it's the blue?
So if I have something like the graph in this new image, which appears to have an area defined by two functions throughout, it would be acceptable to have a single integration rather than two?
 

Attachments

  • Screen Shot 2018-11-29 at 2.50.01 AM.png
    Screen Shot 2018-11-29 at 2.50.01 AM.png
    5.8 KB · Views: 426
PeroK said:
Note that the region is not the difference of two functions.
Thanks for pointing that out. The given formula in post 1 has a subtraction of two areas, but it makes sense that this would be an addition of the two since we're splitting it up.
 
opus said:
I haven't gotten to such a problem but I'll keep this in mind when I do.So on [0,1), the function defining the region is the orange one, and from (1,2] it's the blue?
So if I have something like the graph in this new image, which appears to have an area defined by two functions throughout, it would be acceptable to have a single integration rather than two?

That area is the region between two functions!
 
PeroK said:
That area is the region between two functions!
Yes, but you're saying since, a part of the area is strictly defined by one function, and the other part is strictly defined by another, it needs to be separated into a manner where we take the integral over the entire domain covered by one function, the integral of the rest of the domain covered by the other, and then add them up. Correct?
 
opus said:
Yes, but you're saying since, a part of the area is strictly defined by one function, and the other part is strictly defined by another, it needs to be separated into a manner where we take the integral over the entire domain covered by one function, the integral of the rest of the domain covered by the other, and then add them up. Correct?

Your second example is the area between two functions.

You need to be able to identify what you are integrating. For example, if I asked you to calculate the area of a triangle and square joined together, you would have to calculate the area of the triangle and the area of the square and add them together. There's nothing except your own logical thinking that will tell you that!

The first example you posted was the area between the x-axis and complicated function that was part parabola, before becoming a straight line. Like the triangle and square, you need to calculate those two parts separately. Again, you have to see that for yourself.

The second example you posted is the area between two curves. You can calculate that by integrating the difference of the two functions. Again, you have to see that for yourself.
 
  • Like
Likes   Reactions: opus
Loud and clear. Thanks!
 

Similar threads

  • · Replies 2 ·
Replies
2
Views
3K
  • · Replies 20 ·
Replies
20
Views
4K
  • · Replies 24 ·
Replies
24
Views
4K
  • · Replies 2 ·
Replies
2
Views
3K
  • · Replies 3 ·
Replies
3
Views
3K
  • · Replies 2 ·
Replies
2
Views
2K
  • · Replies 1 ·
Replies
1
Views
3K
  • · Replies 3 ·
Replies
3
Views
2K
  • · Replies 7 ·
Replies
7
Views
2K
  • · Replies 3 ·
Replies
3
Views
1K