Page 1 of 1
e z integration
Posted:
Wed Apr 25, 2007 4:05 pm
by bradp
[unparseable or potentially dangerous latex formula]
?
Re: e z integration
Posted:
Wed Apr 25, 2007 4:17 pm
by stupidityismygam
Posted:
Wed Apr 25, 2007 4:17 pm
by bradp
o.. i thought there was some u substitution or something.. thanks :D
Posted:
Wed Apr 25, 2007 4:22 pm
by stupidityismygam
Posted:
Wed Apr 25, 2007 4:24 pm
by bradp
i dunno what i was thinking
Posted:
Wed Apr 25, 2007 4:25 pm
by stupidityismygam
Posted:
Wed Apr 25, 2007 4:26 pm
by bradp
I'll 89 you.
Posted:
Wed Apr 25, 2007 4:29 pm
by stupidityismygam
Posted:
Wed Apr 25, 2007 4:31 pm
by stupidityismygam
btw, once you get to 400 posts you better make a new username
so that is goes along with your perfection...
Posted:
Wed Apr 25, 2007 4:32 pm
by bradp
nah
what is klein klean
Posted:
Wed Apr 25, 2007 4:34 pm
by stupidityismygam
hmm it is like klein clean....except kleinians spell every thing that starts with a c with a k
examples:
klean
kan
kats
kan't
Posted:
Wed Apr 25, 2007 4:35 pm
by bradp
we don't do that at kingwood.
Posted:
Wed Apr 25, 2007 4:37 pm
by stupidityismygam
well klein>kingwood...
enough said
Posted:
Wed Apr 25, 2007 5:23 pm
by bradp
if it was [unparseable or potentially dangerous latex formula] you'd have to do some substitution, right?
Posted:
Wed Apr 25, 2007 8:28 pm
by gemini9525
yep yep
Posted:
Wed Apr 25, 2007 8:36 pm
by Celsion
Posted:
Wed Apr 25, 2007 9:35 pm
by Kurt
Posted:
Wed Apr 25, 2007 9:43 pm
by AuSmith
Posted:
Wed Apr 25, 2007 9:59 pm
by Kurt
You can really even apply the same logic to avoid integration by parts in some simple cases (although arguably most of those "simple" cases can employ tabular integration to "avoid" it as well).
Good example: [unparseable or potentially dangerous latex formula].
You could use integration by parts, but think about it: what type of function could possibly contain a [unparseable or potentially dangerous latex formula] in the derivative? Obviously something that allows for the product rule, in which the [unparseable or potentially dangerous latex formula] must remain. But this other function needs to drop to 1 (so that just [unparseable or potentially dangerous latex formula] remains) when you do that part of the product rule, so the other function multiplied on needs to be [unparseable or potentially dangerous latex formula]. So you have [unparseable or potentially dangerous latex formula]...but the derivative of that is [unparseable or potentially dangerous latex formula]...so you also need something that, when you take the derivative, cancels out the 1 out front - which is [unparseable or potentially dangerous latex formula].
So [unparseable or potentially dangerous latex formula].
(...It ends up being a lot quicker to do intuitively then to explain doing it intuitively. :P Either way, it ends up being handy on all sorts of problems when you don't want to bother writing down stuff - stuff like this can easily be reasoned out mentally.)