Why can't the indefinite integral be written with sigma notation?

In summary, the conversation discusses the differences between integration and summation, specifically the use of infinitesimal measures in integration and the concept of ∞ as a number. The conversation also delves into the relationship between the indefinite integral and the area under the curve, and the algebraic process for indefinite integration. The conclusion is that the most practical way to determine the indefinite integral is to follow the derivation process in reverse.
  • #1
hddd123456789
92
0
Hi, I've been wondering this since I started learning integration. I get that ∫ is basically an elongated S for "sum", because that is what it is basically doing. But then Ʃ does the same thing as well. If I'm understanding the difference, it is that Ʃ increments by finite measures, whereas ∫ increments by infinitesimal measures. But even if that is the difference, can't you 'simulate' infinitesimal incrementation with sigma notation? I gave it a shot below:

[itex]∫f(x)dx=\sum^{∞}_{i=1}f(idx)dx+\sum^{∞}_{i=1}f(-idx)dx=\sum^{∞}_{i=1}f(idx)dx+f(-idx)dx=\sum^{∞}_{i=-∞}f(idx)dx[/itex]

Which is basically saying that the indefinite integral is equal to a sum. The way to get the sum is to divide the real number line from 0 to ∞ into ∞ parts. I get that ∞ isn't any particular number, but shouldn't we at least be able to say that each of these ∞ parts has a length of dx?

If that's the case, then you would take two sums, one from 0 to ∞, and the other from 0 to -∞ and increment by dx as you sum each area given by f(i*dx)*dx from the positive and negative ends of the number line. What do you think?

[Edit: I see that the first two sums is actually not equal to the third, since the first two actually skip over 0. So technically, the indefinitely integral is equal to the last sum, not the first two?]
 
Last edited:
Mathematics news on Phys.org
  • #2
The serious problem with the formula you give is that the result of an indefinite integral is supposed to be a function. The formula you give evaluates to a number.

The less serious problem is the one you already pointed out: ∞ is not a number. That caveat aside, the approach you give is the essense of the Riemann integral.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Riemann_integral
 
  • #3
Yeah, as soon as I tried to solve out using that formula, I realized for myself that this is basically trying to sum up the whole are under the curve to infinity. Basically it is equal to the definite integral from -∞ to ∞, as below?

[itex]∫^{∞}_{-∞}f(x)dx=\sum^{∞}_{i=-∞}f(idx)dx[/itex]
 
  • #4
And actually, I had another question that was related enough that I figured I would ask in the same thread. I sort of understand, I think, that the motivation for calculating the area under the curve and determining of the anti-derivative/indefinite integral were not necessarily related. And that the indefinite integral said something about the area under the curve wasn't known a priori?

Well, anyway, what I'm wondering is when I see for example the following:

[itex]f(x)=\frac{d}{dx}F(x)=\frac{F(x+dx)-F(x)}{dx}[/itex]

I can apply it algebraically using infinitesimals to, for example, f(x)=x^2, as per:

[itex]\frac{d}{dx}x^2=\frac{(x+dx)^2-x^2}{dx}[/itex]
[itex]=\frac{x^2+2xdx+dx^2-x^2}{dx}[/itex]
[itex]=\frac{2xdx+dx^2}{dx}[/itex]
[itex]=\frac{dx(2x+dx)}{dx}[/itex]
[itex]=2x+dx[/itex]
[itex]=2x+0[/itex]
[itex]=2x[/itex]

But is there an equivalent algebraic process for indefinite integration that applies at least to polynomials? I get that integration is basically like taking an infinitesimal sum, which from the scale of real numbers would be akin to taking an infinite sum of infinitesimals, so the only method that I can think of is the algebraic equivalence of a series. But these just seem so clunky for me. Am I missing something, or is the only practical way to determine the indefinite integral to just follow the derivation process in reverse?

And apologies if my terminology is a bit non-rigorous.
 
  • #5


I can provide an explanation for why the indefinite integral cannot be written with sigma notation. The main reason is that sigma notation is used to represent a finite sum, while the indefinite integral represents an infinite sum.

In your example, you are attempting to divide the real number line from 0 to ∞ into an infinite number of parts, which is not possible. This is because the concept of infinity is not a number and cannot be divided into parts.

Furthermore, the notation used in integration, specifically the dx at the end, represents an infinitesimal change in the independent variable. This cannot be simulated with sigma notation because sigma notation is based on finite increments.

Moreover, the ∫ symbol represents the limit of a sum as the number of increments approaches infinity. This concept cannot be expressed with sigma notation, which only deals with finite sums.

In summary, while sigma notation and integration may seem similar in their use of summation, they are fundamentally different concepts and cannot be used interchangeably. The indefinite integral represents an infinite sum and cannot be written with sigma notation, which is used for finite sums.
 

FAQ: Why can't the indefinite integral be written with sigma notation?

Why can't the indefinite integral be written with sigma notation?

The indefinite integral, also known as the antiderivative, represents the family of all functions that have the given derivative. Sigma notation, on the other hand, is used to represent a series of terms with a common pattern. Since the antiderivative is not a series of terms, it cannot be represented using sigma notation.

Can we approximate the indefinite integral using sigma notation?

Yes, we can approximate the value of the indefinite integral by using a Riemann sum, which is a type of sigma notation. However, this is only an approximation and not an exact representation of the antiderivative.

Are there any benefits to using sigma notation for indefinite integrals?

No, there are no benefits to using sigma notation for indefinite integrals as it is not a suitable representation for this type of mathematical concept. It may cause confusion and lead to incorrect interpretations of the antiderivative.

Can we use sigma notation for definite integrals?

Yes, sigma notation is commonly used to represent definite integrals, which have a specific range of values and can be evaluated to give a single numerical value. This is different from the indefinite integral, which represents a family of functions.

Is there an alternative notation for the indefinite integral?

Yes, the most common notation for the indefinite integral is the integral symbol (∫), which is used in calculus to represent the antiderivative of a function. This notation is more precise and does not have the limitations of sigma notation in representing the antiderivative.

Similar threads

Replies
22
Views
2K
Replies
13
Views
2K
Replies
6
Views
3K
Replies
9
Views
1K
Back
Top