Is there a simpler way to integrate this?

  • Thread starter aruwin
  • Start date
  • Tags
    Integrate
In summary: This will cause your final answer to be incorrect. You made a major sign error in your integral:instead of + (-2 + z)^6 you wrote - (-2 +...-2)^6. This will cause your final answer to be incorrect.
  • #1
aruwin
208
0
Hi, I was wondering if there's a simpler way to integrate this? I got the answer by expanding one by one but that's such a long process! I got the answer 104/5 which is correct,though.


∫∫∫D (x + y + z)^4 dxdydz
D = {(x,y,z) | -1≤ x ≤1, -1≤y≤1, -1≤z≤ }
 
Physics news on Phys.org
  • #2
Hey aruwin.

For your integral, you are dealing with a simple rectangular volume, so the integral in its form is best evaluated by doing each variable separately at a time.

If you did it this way, then there's no point stressing about a better way to do it if you know and understand how to evaluate the integral.
 
  • #3
you could keep in your head that the integral if (x+a)^n = (1/n)(x+a)^(n+1) if you wanted but there's nothing wrong with expanding everything out
 
  • #4
chiro said:
Hey aruwin.

For your integral, you are dealing with a simple rectangular volume, so the integral in its form is best evaluated by doing each variable separately at a time.

If you did it this way, then there's no point stressing about a better way to do it if you know and understand how to evaluate the integral.

How do I do each variable sperately at a time? You mean like ∫dx∫dy∫dz ?

Ok,what about the function inside it? When say rectangle, it means
(x+y+z)2(x+y+z)2,right? But still,how do I integrate it like this?
 
  • #5
aruwin said:
How do I do each variable sperately at a time? You mean like ∫dx∫dy∫dz ?

Ok,what about the function inside it? When say rectangle, it means
(x+y+z)2(x+y+z)2,right? But still,how do I integrate it like this?

You do it in the form of (x+a)^n with respect to dx and integrate out the x value. Then do the same for the y and the same for the z until you get a numerical quantity.

Since x,y,z are all orthogonal variables, you can do this with no problem just like you would integrated say xydydx by keeping one variable 'constant' and then integrating it with respect to the other.
 
  • #6
chiro said:
You do it in the form of (x+a)^n with respect to dx and integrate out the x value. Then do the same for the y and the same for the z until you get a numerical quantity.

Since x,y,z are all orthogonal variables, you can do this with no problem just like you would integrated say xydydx by keeping one variable 'constant' and then integrating it with respect to the other.

OK,I am going to ask you something first, is this correct?

∫∫ (x+y+z)5/5 dydz

But what happens to the x inside the bracket?Shouldn't I do something about it?
 
  • #7
aruwin said:
OK,I am going to ask you something first, is this correct?

∫∫ (x+y+z)5/5 dydz

But what happens to the x inside the bracket?Shouldn't I do something about it?

take [itex]\int \int \int (x+y+z)^4 dx dy dz[/itex] and stick some brackets in there [itex]\int \int ( \int (x+y+z)^4 dx ) dy dz[/itex]
Substitute y+z = a
perform integration
substitute a = y + z
remove brackets
repeat

:biggrin:
 
  • #8
genericusrnme said:
take [itex]\int \int \int (x+y+z)^4 dx dy dz[/itex] and stick some brackets in there [itex]\int \int ( \int (x+y+z)^4 dx ) dy dz[/itex]
Substitute y+z = a
perform integration
substitute a = y + z
remove brackets
repeat

:biggrin:

Won't that change the range for dx?
 
  • #9
aruwin said:
Won't that change the range for dx?

nope, all you've done is substitute a for y + z as to avoid confusion, you've not touched x or dx at all (you haven't really altered anything)
 
  • #10
aruwin said:
Won't that change the range for dx?

It only changes the interval if the interval depends on those other variables.

To understand this, you need to understand orthogonality: things are orthogonal if changing one variable doesn't change another. We can write this in terms of dA/dB = 0 and dB/dA = 0 where neither change in accordance with the other variable.

If your limits were say from 0 to y^2 - z, then yes the limit would have to factor this in but because each variable is truly orthogonal, then this doesn't happen (in this case).
 
  • #11
genericusrnme said:
take [itex]\int \int \int (x+y+z)^4 dx dy dz[/itex] and stick some brackets in there [itex]\int \int ( \int (x+y+z)^4 dx ) dy dz[/itex]
Substitute y+z = a
perform integration
substitute a = y + z
remove brackets
repeat

:biggrin:

So I did what you told me but I didn't get the answer :( Tell me what is wrong here.
Check,please...

Untitled-1.jpg
 
  • #12
You wrote in your final step 27 instead of 2x17
 
  • #13
chiro said:
You wrote in your final step 27 instead of 2x17

Even so, I won't get the answer that is 104/5.
 
  • #14
aruwin said:
Even so, I won't get the answer that is 104/5.

You made a major sign error in your integral:instead of + (-2 + z)^6 you wrote - (-2 + z)^6.
 
  • #15
chiro said:
You made a major sign error in your integral:instead of + (-2 + z)^6 you wrote - (-2 + z)^6.

I will try again.But other than that,I'm doing this the right method,arent I?
 
  • #16
aruwin said:
I will try again.But other than that,I'm doing this the right method,arent I?

Yes. I checked the answer with your calculation using a calculator: it gave 20.8 which is 104/5.
 
  • #17
chiro said:
Yes. I checked the answer with your calculation using a calculator: it gave 20.8 which is 104/5.

I calculated another 2 times but I didn't get the answer :( Are you sure my working there had only one mistake?
 
  • #18
aruwin said:
I calculated another 2 times but I didn't get the answer :( Are you sure my working there had only one mistake?

If you fix up changing the - (-2 + z) to + (-2 + z) and fix up your mistake with the 2^7 and make it 2*(-1)^7 and plug everything in correctly you will get 104/5. Show us your working so we can see what you did.
 
  • #19
chiro said:
If you fix up changing the - (-2 + z) to + (-2 + z) and fix up your mistake with the 2^7 and make it 2*(-1)^7 and plug everything in correctly you will get 104/5. Show us your working so we can see what you did.

Oh,thank you!I got it,I got it!:-p
By the way, I have another question on multiple integration but must I create another thread or can I just continue in here?
 
  • #20
aruwin said:
Oh,thank you!I got it,I got it!:-p
By the way, I have another question on multiple integration but must I create another thread or can I just continue in here?

Just post it in here, it's on topic and a simple continuation of the original threads premise.
 
  • #21
chiro said:
Just post it in here, it's on topic and a simple continuation of the original threads premise.

This seems a little more complicated because there's fraction which is hard to decompose and I don't know how to decompose it anyway. Can you help me out with this one?

J = ∫∫D [(x-y)/(x+y)^3] dxdy

D = {(x,y) | 0 ≤x≤1, 0≤y≤1}
 
  • #22
aruwin said:
This seems a little more complicated because there's fraction which is hard to decompose and I don't know how to decompose it anyway. Can you help me out with this one?

J = ∫∫D [(x-y)/(x+y)^3] dxdy

D = {(x,y) | 0 ≤x≤1, 0≤y≤1}

Try the substitution u = x - y, v = x+y. Remember to work out the Jacobian and the new limits.
 
  • #23
Mute said:
Try the substitution u = x - y, v = x+y. Remember to work out the Jacobian and the new limits.

I did it the other way,though. But I didn't get the answer that I am supposed to. Can you check for me,please?

Untitled-3.jpg
 
  • #24
The integral of y/(1+y)2 is not just -y/(1+y). You missed a term.

By the way, this is actually a pretty insidious integral. After you add the term you missed and get the result, try doing the integral in the opposite order (y first, then x). My earlier suggestion to try a substitution might not be a good alternate way to do this in light of this result.
 
Last edited:
  • #25
Mute said:
The integral of y/(1+y)2 is not just -y/(1+y). You missed a term.

By the way, this is actually a pretty insidious integral. After you add the term you missed and get the result, try doing the integral in the opposite order (y first, then x). My earlier suggestion to try a substitution might not be a good alternate way to do this in light of this result.

Yes, I got it! The integral that I got is -1/2 but how come the answer that my professor gave is ∞? Is there any explanation to that?
 
  • #26
aruwin said:
Yes, I got it! The integral that I got is -1/2 but how come the answer that my professor gave is ∞? Is there any explanation to that?

Did you try doing the integration in the opposite order yet? (y first, then x). I suspect that your professor was not referring to the integral you just performed, but rather the integral of the absolute value of the integrand. To deduce that the integral of |(x-y)/(x+y)3| is infinity, you should do the integral you just solved in the order I suggested and understand what that result means.
 

FAQ: Is there a simpler way to integrate this?

1. What is integration in science?

Integration in science refers to the process of combining different pieces of information or data to create a more complete understanding of a particular phenomenon or concept. It involves synthesizing and connecting various ideas, theories, and data from different sources to form a cohesive whole.

2. Why is integration important in scientific research?

Integration is important in scientific research because it allows scientists to gain a more comprehensive understanding of a topic or problem. By combining different pieces of information, researchers can identify patterns, make connections, and develop new insights that may not have been possible with isolated data. Integration also helps to bridge the gap between different disciplines and promotes collaboration among scientists.

3. What are some challenges with integrating different scientific ideas?

Some challenges with integrating different scientific ideas include differences in terminology, conflicting evidence or theories, and biases or preconceptions held by researchers. It can also be difficult to determine which information is relevant and how to prioritize and combine it in a meaningful way.

4. How can scientists simplify the process of integration?

One way to simplify the process of integration is to use frameworks or models that provide a structure for organizing and connecting different ideas or data. Collaborating with researchers from different backgrounds and perspectives can also help to simplify integration by bringing in diverse viewpoints and expertise.

5. What are some potential benefits of using a simpler approach to integration?

Using a simpler approach to integration can save time and resources, as well as make the research more accessible to a wider audience. It can also help to reduce confusion and increase the clarity of the findings, making it easier to draw conclusions and make recommendations based on the integrated information.

Back
Top