Quick question about multiple integrals

AI Thread Summary
The discussion centers on the splitting of a double integral into the product of two single integrals, specifically under the conditions outlined by Fubini's theorem. It clarifies that this separation is valid when the integrals have constant limits and the functions being integrated are independent of each other. If the limits of integration depend on the variable being integrated, the integrals cannot be separated. The conversation also touches on the importance of understanding these concepts in multivariable calculus, despite the challenges posed by teaching quality. Overall, the participants emphasize the significance of grasping these foundational principles for future mathematical success.
mongoose
Messages
28
Reaction score
0
i was looking through a book and came across a double integral that was split into the product of two single integrals.

it was int (x^n)(y^n ) dxdy split into (int x^n dx)(int y^n dy)

i just finished a course in multivariable calculus(it was by no means thorough), and i didn't know that you could do this.

is this a general rule? a typo? a special case?

thanks in advance.
 
Mathematics news on Phys.org
i think that's just like how a constant comes out of the integrand in single variable integration. since you can treat x^n as a constant with respect to int(y^n*x^n)dy and vice versa you can break it up. of course though you can't brake up integrals over products of the functions of the variable you're integrating over.
 
That's "Fubini's theorem" and I would have thought it would be a fundamental part of any multi-variable calculus class (sure you didn't nod off during that class?).
\int_a^b \int_c^d f(x)g(y) dy dx= \int_a^b f(x)\left[\int_c^d g(y)dy\right]dx
because f(x) depends only on x and is treated like a constant in the "dy" integral. Of course, with constant limits of integeration, \int_c^d g(y)dy, is just a constant, not depending on x, and can be taken out of the "dx" integral:
\int_a^b \int_c^d f(x)g(y) dydx= \left[\int_a^b f(x)dx\right]\left[\int_c^d g(y)dy\right].

Notice that I added the constant limits of integration which you did not have in your integral: that's important. If the limits of integration on the "dy" integral depend on x, you cannot do that:
\int_a^b \int_{\phi(x)}^{\psi(x)} f(x)g(y)dy dx\ne \left[\int_a^b f(x)dx\right]\left[\int_{\phi(x)}^{\psi(x)}g(y)dy\right]
since the expression on the left would be a number while the expression on the right will be a function of x.
 
no...didn't nod off in class...it's community college, they even skipped the whole section on infinite series...go figure

but thanks, that makes sense now. i just didn't get that it's a consequence of switching the order of integration. it wasn't immediately obvious to me.
 
mongoose said:
no...didn't nod off in class...it's community college, they even skipped the whole section on infinite series...go figure

but thanks, that makes sense now. i just didn't get that it's a consequence of switching the order of integration. it wasn't immediately obvious to me.

no offense, really don't be offended, but ****ty teachers is no excuse for not learning a subject thoroughly. and you'll do well if you remember this.
 
hey...maybe that's why I'm asking questions!...duh!
 
Seemingly by some mathematical coincidence, a hexagon of sides 2,2,7,7, 11, and 11 can be inscribed in a circle of radius 7. The other day I saw a math problem on line, which they said came from a Polish Olympiad, where you compute the length x of the 3rd side which is the same as the radius, so that the sides of length 2,x, and 11 are inscribed on the arc of a semi-circle. The law of cosines applied twice gives the answer for x of exactly 7, but the arithmetic is so complex that the...

Similar threads

Back
Top