How can the Laplace transform of L[t^n] be proven?

  • Thread starter mathwurkz
  • Start date
  • Tags
    Proof
In summary, the Laplace transform of a function t^n can be proven using a simple change of variables and the gamma function. This is shown through a formal proof that involves integrating t^n over a given interval and relating it to the gamma function.
  • #1
mathwurkz
41
0
Hey guys, how can this Laplace transform be proven. I always see it in the tables but don't know how it came to be.

[tex]L[t^n] = \frac{n!}{s^{n+1}}[/tex]
 
Physics news on Phys.org
  • #2
Just do the transformation. With a simple change of variables you can reduce the integral to the gamma function.
 
  • #3
Ah. Ok I got it thanks. I guess I must have let it slip by me that gamma function is related.
 
  • #4
here is a formal proof:
You can show that
[tex] \int t^n e^{-ts} dt = -s^{-n-1}\int_{st}^{\infty}x^n e^{-x}dx +c [/tex]
therefore
[tex] \int_{0}^{\infty} t^n e^{-ts} dt =s^{-n-1}\int_{0}^{\infty}x^n e^{-x}dx =s^{-n-1} n![/tex]
 

FAQ: How can the Laplace transform of L[t^n] be proven?

What is a proof?

A proof is a logical and rigorous argument that demonstrates the truth or validity of a statement or theory.

Why is it important to look for a proof?

Looking for a proof allows us to verify the soundness of a statement or theory, and provides evidence to support its validity. It also allows for further understanding and development of concepts.

How do scientists look for a proof?

Scientists use various methods, such as experimentation, observation, and mathematical equations, to gather data and evidence in support of a statement or theory. They then analyze and interpret this data to formulate a logical and coherent proof.

Is a proof always necessary?

In scientific research, a proof is not always necessary, as theories and concepts can be supported by strong evidence and data. However, a proof is essential in mathematical and logical fields to establish the truth of a statement or theory.

Can a proof ever be considered absolute?

In science, there is always a possibility for new evidence or discoveries that may challenge an existing proof. Therefore, a proof may be considered reliable and widely accepted, but it can never be considered absolute or infallible.

Similar threads

Replies
2
Views
2K
Replies
4
Views
2K
Replies
3
Views
3K
Replies
1
Views
1K
Replies
2
Views
2K
Replies
1
Views
637
Replies
1
Views
1K
Back
Top