Integration by parts, can you do this?

In summary: That's why it's easier to show the proof by varying the function itself, because the curve is easier to manipulate. You'd probably be fine with knowing how to parametize a line, and the rest will be explained.In summary, the conversation discusses a formula for integrals involving derivatives, with the condition that the endpoints are not varied. The conversation also delves into the context of the formula, which involves a trajectory in space-time and the use of the variational principle to find the path of least action. The formula is shown to be valid if one of the functions involved vanishes at both endpoints. The conversation also mentions the book "Classical Mechanics" by Goldstein, which elaborates on the concept
  • #1
earlofwessex
87
0
I've seen this formula stated and used, ( in a stanford university video lecture)

[tex] \int \frac{dA}{dt}B\ dt = - \int \frac{dB}{dt}A\ dt [/tex]

with the condition that you don't vary the end points.

but i don't understand how you can just remove the AB term from the right hand side, and I've not been able to find this written anywhere? i know the normal parts rule.

can anyone explain?

thanks
 
Physics news on Phys.org
  • #2
I'll take a guess at it, not knowing the context. If you have

[tex]\int_a^b f'g\ dt = -\int_a^b fg'\ dt[/tex]

then

[tex]0 = \int_a^b f'g + fg'\ dt= \int_a^b (fg)'\ dt = f(b)g(b)-f(a)g(a)[/tex]

So if the product fg has the same values at a and b, it all works. Is that what you mean by "not varying the endpoints"?
 
  • #3
thanks LCKurtz,

hmm, that's true for this, though it seems a bit circular. the context is:
consider a trajectory between two points in space-time, where X is some function of t.

the action is described by [tex] A = \int L(x,x') dt [/tex] where L is the Lagrangian, which depends on both position and velocity.
(is this an integral along the line or something else?)

in order to find the path of least action, we vary [tex] x(t) -> x(t) + \varepsilon f(t) [/tex] and require
[tex] \delta A = \delta \int L(x,x') dt = 0 [/tex]

since [tex] \delta x(t) = \varepsilon f(t), [\tex]and [tex] \delta x'(t) = \varepsilon f'(t)[/tex]

we can write

[tex] \delta \int L(x,x') dt = \varepsilon \int \frac{dL}{dx}f(t) \ + \frac{dL}{dx'}f'(t)\ dt [/tex]

he then states the above rule and re-writes this as
[tex]\varepsilon \int \frac{dL}{dx}f(t) \ - \frac{d}{dt} \frac{dL}{dx'}f(t)\ dt[/tex]

which would impy that the product of [tex]\frac{dL}{dx'}f(t) [/tex] is the same for any t. um, which is true since he goes on to show that f(t) = 0 for any t, but he uses that final expression to show it.

besides, he states the rule for a general case, not specific to this situation.

sorry if that's a bit long winded, i'd appreciate your thoughts
 
  • #4
You derivation is not quite correct. I would advise you to see Goldstein (Classical Mechanics). It has a thorough explanation of Lagrangian mechanics starting with the variational principle.

You will be making variations with respect to [tex]\varepsilon [/tex], using [tex] x(t, \varepsilon ) = x(t, 0) + \varepsilon f(t) [/tex], where x(t, 0) is the true solution and f(t) can be any function that vanishes at the end points.

When you take the derivative of the action w.r.t [tex]\varepsilon [/tex], using integration by parts, the second term will give you;
[tex] \int dt \frac{dL}{d\dot{x}} \frac{d\dot{x}}{d\varepsilon} = \frac{dL}{d\dot{x}} \frac{dx}{d\varepsilon} | - \int dt \frac{d}{dt} (\frac{dL}{d\dot{x}}) \frac{dx}{d\varepsilon}[/tex]

The first of the terms on the right size is evaluated at the end points, and since [tex]\frac{dx}{d\varepsilon} = f(t)[/tex] vanishes there, this term is zero.


earlofwessex said:
thanks LCKurtz,

hmm, that's true for this, though it seems a bit circular. the context is:
consider a trajectory between two points in space-time, where X is some function of t.

the action is described by [tex] A = \int L(x,x') dt [/tex] where L is the Lagrangian, which depends on both position and velocity.
(is this an integral along the line or something else?)

in order to find the path of least action, we vary [tex] x(t) -> x(t) + \varepsilon f(t) [/tex] and require
[tex] \delta A = \delta \int L(x,x') dt = 0 [/tex]

since [tex] \delta x(t) = \varepsilon f(t), [\tex]and [tex] \delta x'(t) = \varepsilon f'(t)[/tex]

we can write

[tex] \delta \int L(x,x') dt = \varepsilon \int \frac{dL}{dx}f(t) \ + \frac{dL}{dx'}f'(t)\ dt [/tex]

he then states the above rule and re-writes this as
[tex]\varepsilon \int \frac{dL}{dx}f(t) \ - \frac{d}{dt} \frac{dL}{dx'}f(t)\ dt[/tex]

which would impy that the product of [tex]\frac{dL}{dx'}f(t) [/tex] is the same for any t. um, which is true since he goes on to show that f(t) = 0 for any t, but he uses that final expression to show it.

besides, he states the rule for a general case, not specific to this situation.

sorry if that's a bit long winded, i'd appreciate your thoughts
 
  • #5
So, to generalize it, [tex] \int \frac{dA}{dt}B\ dt = - \int \frac{dB}{dt}A\ dt [/tex] is true if one of the functions A or B vanishes at both endpoints, which is what LCKurtz showed. You just have to remember in the variational principle A and B will be derivatives.


earlofwessex said:
I've seen this formula stated and used, ( in a stanford university video lecture)

[tex] \int \frac{dA}{dt}B\ dt = - \int \frac{dB}{dt}A\ dt [/tex]

with the condition that you don't vary the end points.

but i don't understand how you can just remove the AB term from the right hand side, and I've not been able to find this written anywhere? i know the normal parts rule.

can anyone explain?

thanks
 
  • #6
ah ok, thanks that makes a lot of sense.

Goldstein (Classical Mechanics) is a textbook right?
what level of calculus do i need to follow it? i think i was confused above because I'm not familiar with the "types" of integral, open surface, closed loop and so on, just with everyday definite and indefinite area under a 2d curve. I'm definitely nowhere near vector or field calculus.

thanks
 
  • #7
Yes, it's a book. Usually for graduate level, but the section on calculus of variations is just an ellaboration of what you've probably already learned.

This method uses integrating along a parametized line, which is something you learn early on in vector calculus. I think what throws many people for the first time is that it's a curve through phase-space, so it's difficult to visualize.
 

FAQ: Integration by parts, can you do this?

1. How does integration by parts work?

Integration by parts is a technique used in calculus to solve integrals of the form ∫udv. It involves choosing a part of the integrand to be the u and a different part to be the dv, and then using the formula ∫udv = uv - ∫vdu to simplify the integral.

2. When should I use integration by parts?

Integration by parts is typically used when the integrand involves a product of two functions, or when repeated integration by substitution is not possible. It can also be helpful when the integral contains a polynomial, trigonometric, or logarithmic function.

3. What are the steps for integration by parts?

The steps for integration by parts are: 1) Identify the u and dv parts, 2) Calculate du and v, 3) Plug in the values for u, du, v, and dv into the formula ∫udv = uv - ∫vdu, and 4) Simplify the resulting integral and solve for the answer.

4. How do I choose which part to be u and which part to be dv?

There is no set rule for choosing u and dv, but a helpful technique is to use the acronym LIATE: Logarithmic, Inverse trigonometric, Algebraic, Trigonometric, and Exponential. This serves as a guideline for choosing u to be the first function in the acronym and dv to be the remaining function.

5. Can I use integration by parts with definite integrals?

Yes, integration by parts can also be used with definite integrals. After solving the integral, you can then substitute in the limits of integration and evaluate the definite integral. However, be aware that this may require additional algebraic manipulation.

Back
Top