| 
January 2nd, 2009, 11:42 AM
| | Newbie | | Join Date: Jan 2009
Posts: 15
Country: Thanks: 8
Thanked 0 Times in 0 Posts
| | Integration of Logaritmic Functions
I tired separating and simplifying the problem into two different integrals:  +
and get...
evaluating I get
but that is not any of the solutions. | 
January 2nd, 2009, 11:57 AM
| | Member | | Join Date: Dec 2008
Posts: 247
Country: Thanks: 3
Thanked 88 Times in 87 Posts
| | Try Integration by Substitution, which is basically the Chain Rule backward:
Letting  , we can see that  , so that the integral becomes
Hope this helps. | 
January 2nd, 2009, 12:32 PM
| | Newbie | | Join Date: Jan 2009
Posts: 15
Country: Thanks: 8
Thanked 0 Times in 0 Posts
| | Natural log is supposed to be in the answer...any ideas? | 
January 2nd, 2009, 12:39 PM
|  | Wesnoth Rookie | | Join Date: Dec 2007 Location: IISc, Bangalore
Posts: 1,343
Country: Thanks: 440
Thanked 654 Times in 548 Posts
| | Hi frog09,
Do you understand what Scott H says in #2? He has almost completely worked the problem for you.
Cant you figure out what  is ?
If you integrate the above you will see the "supposed natural logs"
__________________ To view links or images in signatures your post count must be 10 or greater. You currently have 0 posts.
Algebra is the offer made by the devil to the mathematician. The devil says: `I will give you this powerful machine, it will answer any question you like. All you need to do is give me your soul: give up geometry and you will have this marvellous machine.' —Michael Atiyah | | The following users thank Isomorphism for this useful post: | |  | 
January 2nd, 2009, 12:57 PM
| | Newbie | | Join Date: Jan 2009
Posts: 15
Country: Thanks: 8
Thanked 0 Times in 0 Posts
| | yes! a moment of enlightenment. thanks! | 
January 2nd, 2009, 01:05 PM
|  | Senior Member | | Join Date: Nov 2008 Location: Moscow
Posts: 352
Country: Thanks: 17
Thanked 195 Times in 158 Posts
| | Quote:
Originally Posted by frog09
I tired separating and simplifying the problem into two different integrals:  +
and get...
evaluating I get
but that is not any of the solutions.  | | 
January 2nd, 2009, 01:20 PM
| | Member | | Join Date: Dec 2008
Posts: 247
Country: Thanks: 3
Thanked 88 Times in 87 Posts
| | Are you sure? I thought we had to change the bounds of integration after the change of variables.
Frog09, remember also that  is defined as | 
January 2nd, 2009, 01:49 PM
| | Senior Member | | Join Date: Oct 2008
Posts: 282
Country: Thanks: 7
Thanked 73 Times in 72 Posts
| | Except that he didn't actually change the variable, so it was ok. This is how I would keep track of it...
(As usual straight continuous lines diff or anti-diff with respect to x, straight dashed lines with respect to the dashed balloon expression.)
Don't integrate - balloontegrate! Balloon Calculus: worked examples from past papers
Last edited by tom@ballooncalculus; January 2nd, 2009 at 01:55 PM.
Reason: typo
| 
January 2nd, 2009, 01:52 PM
|  | Senior Member | | Join Date: Nov 2008 Location: Moscow
Posts: 352
Country: Thanks: 17
Thanked 195 Times in 158 Posts
| | Quote:
Originally Posted by Scott H Are you sure? I thought we had to change the bounds of integration after the change of variables.
Frog09, remember also that  is defined as  | Yes, I am sure!
In my solution we must not change the bounds of integration.
Because
Last edited by DeMath; January 3rd, 2009 at 08:44 AM.
| 
January 3rd, 2009, 08:36 PM
| | Member | | Join Date: Dec 2008
Posts: 247
Country: Thanks: 3
Thanked 88 Times in 87 Posts
| | All right, I see. | | Thread Tools | | | | Display Modes | Linear Mode |
Posting Rules
| You may not post new threads You may not post replies You may not post attachments You may not edit your posts HTML code is Off | | | All times are GMT -7. The time now is 11:10 PM. | | |
 | |  |