Discussion about math, puzzles, games and fun. Useful symbols: ÷ × ½ √ ∞ ≠ ≤ ≥ ≈ ⇒ ± ∈ Δ θ ∴ ∑ ∫ • π ƒ ¹ ² ³ °
 

You are not logged in. #1 20060217 07:55:04
Definite integrals by partsMy book says that the definite version of the integration by parts formula is: When actually evaluating the integral, I'm not sure how to interpret this. I think it could be either: ...or, it could be: Is it one of those, or something else entirely? (Good gads, LaTeX competes with regular expressions for ugliest mishmash of punctuation ever.) Last edited by ryos (20060217 11:39:26) El que pega primero pega dos veces. #3 20060217 08:30:15
Re: Definite integrals by partsIf what you copied is straight from your book, that's the weirdest defintion for integration by parts I've ever seen. From this, it should be clear that you must first divide up your function into two parts, u and dv, then solve for v and du, and finally just plug it all back in. "In the real world, this would be a problem. But in mathematics, we can just define a place where this problem doesn't exist. So we'll go ahead and do that now..." #5 20060217 12:03:01
Re: Definite integrals by partspardon me if I'm not interpreting this correctly, I think Ryos is far more advanced then me in math knowledge and I find it suprising he would ask such a simple question. Which is why I doubt I'm interpreting this question correctly. Last edited by mikau (20060217 12:03:49) A logarithm is just a misspelled algorithm. #6 20060217 14:06:05
Re: Definite integrals by partsI'm advanced eh? I guess I'm good at sounding smart or something. I'm pretty sure I'm in the same place (Calculus 2) as you, mikau. Last edited by ryos (20060217 15:42:24) El que pega primero pega dos veces. #7 20060217 15:21:35
Re: Definite integrals by parts
What the math? Where did you come up with that? It should be 3e^3  e^3  (2e^2  e^2). Where the heck did you come up with such a visually repelling expression? Last edited by mikau (20060217 15:21:55) A logarithm is just a misspelled algorithm. #9 20060218 00:49:42
Re: Definite integrals by parts
[Please ignore this post as it is made of 100% pure stupidity. x_x] Why did the vector cross the road? It wanted to be normal. #12 20060218 12:15:10
Re: Definite integrals by partsLOL. I guess the tutorial I found was a good one... El que pega primero pega dos veces. 