Mixing
Evaluating definite integrals using Fundamental Theorem of Calculus
$begingroup$
Here is a statement of the second part of the Fundamental Theorem of Calculus (FTC2), from a well-known calculus text (James Stewart, Calculus, 4th ed):
If $f$ is continuous on $[a,b]$, then $int_a^b f(x) , dx = F(b)-F(a)$, where $F$ is any [emphasis mine] antiderivative of $f$, that is, a function such that $F'=f$.
The following, however, seems to give a counterexample.*
Can someone resolve this for me?:
Let $f(x) = frac{1}{4 sin (x)+5}$.
$f$ is continuous on $[0, 2 pi]$:
Consider two antiderivatives of $f$, $F_1$ and $F_2$:
$$F_1(x) = frac{x}{3}+frac{2}{3} tan^{-1}left(frac{cos (x)}{sin (x)+2}right)$$
$$F_2(x)=frac{1}{3} left(tan ^{-1}left(2-frac{3}{tan left(frac{x}{2}right)+2}right)-tan^{-1}left(2-frac{3}{cot left(frac{x}{2}right)+2}right)right).$$
Using Mathematica, I've confirmed that both $F_1'= f$ and $F_2'= f$. According to my reading of the above statement of FTC(2), $int_0^{2pi} f (x) , dx = F_1(2pi)-F_1(0)= F_2(2pi)-F_2(0)$
However,
$F_1(2pi)-F_1(0)=2pi/3$
$F_2(2pi)-F_2(0)=0$
Note from the plots below that $F_1$ is continuous on $[a,b]$, while $F_2$ is not. Given all of this, it seems the sufficient condition for $int_a^b f (x) , dx = F(b)-F(a)$ is that the antiderivative be continuous on $[a,b]$, not the integrand.
$F_1 =$
$F_2=$
*I've taken this example function from a wolfram.com blog.
calculus definite-integrals
asked Jan 19 at 16:16
theoristtheorist
1916
$endgroup$
add a comment |
$begingroup$
Here is a statement of the second part of the Fundamental Theorem of Calculus (FTC2), from a well-known calculus text (James Stewart, Calculus, 4th ed):
If $f$ is continuous on $[a,b]$, then $int_a^b f(x) , dx = F(b)-F(a)$, where $F$ is any [emphasis mine] antiderivative of $f$, that is, a function such that $F'=f$.
The following, however, seems to give a counterexample.*
Can someone resolve this for me?:
Let $f(x) = frac{1}{4 sin (x)+5}$.
$f$ is continuous on $[0, 2 pi]$:
Consider two antiderivatives of $f$, $F_1$ and $F_2$:
$$F_1(x) = frac{x}{3}+frac{2}{3} tan^{-1}left(frac{cos (x)}{sin (x)+2}right)$$
$$F_2(x)=frac{1}{3} left(tan ^{-1}left(2-frac{3}{tan left(frac{x}{2}right)+2}right)-tan^{-1}left(2-frac{3}{cot left(frac{x}{2}right)+2}right)right).$$
Using Mathematica, I've confirmed that both $F_1'= f$ and $F_2'= f$. According to my reading of the above statement of FTC(2), $int_0^{2pi} f (x) , dx = F_1(2pi)-F_1(0)= F_2(2pi)-F_2(0)$
However,
$F_1(2pi)-F_1(0)=2pi/3$
$F_2(2pi)-F_2(0)=0$
Note from the plots below that $F_1$ is continuous on $[a,b]$, while $F_2$ is not. Given all of this, it seems the sufficient condition for $int_a^b f (x) , dx = F(b)-F(a)$ is that the antiderivative be continuous on $[a,b]$, not the integrand.
$F_1 =$
$F_2=$
*I've taken this example function from a wolfram.com blog.
calculus definite-integrals
asked Jan 19 at 16:16
theoristtheorist
1916
$endgroup$
1
$begingroup$
It's obvious just from the graphs that $F_2$ is not an antiderivative. At the points of discontinuity, $F_2$ has a limit of its derivative, but that's not the same thing as being differentiable at that point.
$endgroup$
– aschepler
Jan 20 at 3:56
$begingroup$
The integral function of any function is continuous period. So if you got an $F$ that wasn't continuous then it wasn't an integral. By integral I mean $int_0^x f(t) dt = F(x)$. An integral need not be differentiable though.
$endgroup$
– The Great Duck
Jan 20 at 7:19
$begingroup$
$F_1$ and $F_2$ can be made equal by adding constants, $c_i$, in each interval where $F_2$ is continuous. For instance $c_iapprox0.524$ when $xin(-0.93, 4.07)$ and so on. These $c_i$ account for the discontinuities in $f(x)$ but as long as you're not integrating over any discontinuities, $F_2$ would be valid. This is all because the antiderivative of a discontinuous function may have multiple constants of integration (even in the case of $int frac1xmathrm{d}x$).
$endgroup$
– Jam
Jan 20 at 20:10
$begingroup$
Great Duck forgets about the Heavyside impulse function.
$endgroup$
– richard1941
Jan 24 at 5:33
$begingroup$
@richard1941 The Heaviside step function is not the antiderivative of a function. The Dirac delta function is not a true function in the sense of real analysis (though it can be addressed by the theory of "generalized functions").
$endgroup$
– Christian Sykes
Feb 13 at 4:48
add a comment |
$begingroup$
Here is a statement of the second part of the Fundamental Theorem of Calculus (FTC2), from a well-known calculus text (James Stewart, Calculus, 4th ed):
If $f$ is continuous on $[a,b]$, then $int_a^b f(x) , dx = F(b)-F(a)$, where $F$ is any [emphasis mine] antiderivative of $f$, that is, a function such that $F'=f$.
The following, however, seems to give a counterexample.*
Can someone resolve this for me?:
Let $f(x) = frac{1}{4 sin (x)+5}$.
$f$ is continuous on $[0, 2 pi]$:
Consider two antiderivatives of $f$, $F_1$ and $F_2$:
$$F_1(x) = frac{x}{3}+frac{2}{3} tan^{-1}left(frac{cos (x)}{sin (x)+2}right)$$
$$F_2(x)=frac{1}{3} left(tan ^{-1}left(2-frac{3}{tan left(frac{x}{2}right)+2}right)-tan^{-1}left(2-frac{3}{cot left(frac{x}{2}right)+2}right)right).$$
Using Mathematica, I've confirmed that both $F_1'= f$ and $F_2'= f$. According to my reading of the above statement of FTC(2), $int_0^{2pi} f (x) , dx = F_1(2pi)-F_1(0)= F_2(2pi)-F_2(0)$
However,
$F_1(2pi)-F_1(0)=2pi/3$
$F_2(2pi)-F_2(0)=0$
Note from the plots below that $F_1$ is continuous on $[a,b]$, while $F_2$ is not. Given all of this, it seems the sufficient condition for $int_a^b f (x) , dx = F(b)-F(a)$ is that the antiderivative be continuous on $[a,b]$, not the integrand.
$F_1 =$
$F_2=$
*I've taken this example function from a wolfram.com blog.
calculus definite-integrals
asked Jan 19 at 16:16
theoristtheorist
1916
$endgroup$
Here is a statement of the second part of the Fundamental Theorem of Calculus (FTC2), from a well-known calculus text (James Stewart, Calculus, 4th ed):
If $f$ is continuous on $[a,b]$, then $int_a^b f(x) , dx = F(b)-F(a)$, where $F$ is any [emphasis mine] antiderivative of $f$, that is, a function such that $F'=f$.
The following, however, seems to give a counterexample.*
Can someone resolve this for me?:
Let $f(x) = frac{1}{4 sin (x)+5}$.
$f$ is continuous on $[0, 2 pi]$:
Consider two antiderivatives of $f$, $F_1$ and $F_2$:
$$F_1(x) = frac{x}{3}+frac{2}{3} tan^{-1}left(frac{cos (x)}{sin (x)+2}right)$$
$$F_2(x)=frac{1}{3} left(tan ^{-1}left(2-frac{3}{tan left(frac{x}{2}right)+2}right)-tan^{-1}left(2-frac{3}{cot left(frac{x}{2}right)+2}right)right).$$
Using Mathematica, I've confirmed that both $F_1'= f$ and $F_2'= f$. According to my reading of the above statement of FTC(2), $int_0^{2pi} f (x) , dx = F_1(2pi)-F_1(0)= F_2(2pi)-F_2(0)$
However,
$F_1(2pi)-F_1(0)=2pi/3$
$F_2(2pi)-F_2(0)=0$
Note from the plots below that $F_1$ is continuous on $[a,b]$, while $F_2$ is not. Given all of this, it seems the sufficient condition for $int_a^b f (x) , dx = F(b)-F(a)$ is that the antiderivative be continuous on $[a,b]$, not the integrand.
$F_1 =$
$F_2=$
*I've taken this example function from a wolfram.com blog.
calculus definite-integrals
calculus definite-integrals
asked Jan 19 at 16:16
theoristtheorist
1916
asked Jan 19 at 16:16
theoristtheorist
1916
edited Jan 25 at 0:32
theorist
asked Jan 19 at 16:16
theoristtheorist
1916
asked Jan 19 at 16:16
theoristtheorist
1916
asked Jan 19 at 16:16
theoristtheorist
1916
1916
1
$begingroup$
It's obvious just from the graphs that $F_2$ is not an antiderivative. At the points of discontinuity, $F_2$ has a limit of its derivative, but that's not the same thing as being differentiable at that point.
$endgroup$
– aschepler
Jan 20 at 3:56
$begingroup$
The integral function of any function is continuous period. So if you got an $F$ that wasn't continuous then it wasn't an integral. By integral I mean $int_0^x f(t) dt = F(x)$. An integral need not be differentiable though.
$endgroup$
– The Great Duck
Jan 20 at 7:19
$begingroup$
$F_1$ and $F_2$ can be made equal by adding constants, $c_i$, in each interval where $F_2$ is continuous. For instance $c_iapprox0.524$ when $xin(-0.93, 4.07)$ and so on. These $c_i$ account for the discontinuities in $f(x)$ but as long as you're not integrating over any discontinuities, $F_2$ would be valid. This is all because the antiderivative of a discontinuous function may have multiple constants of integration (even in the case of $int frac1xmathrm{d}x$).
$endgroup$
– Jam
Jan 20 at 20:10
$begingroup$
Great Duck forgets about the Heavyside impulse function.
$endgroup$
– richard1941
Jan 24 at 5:33
$begingroup$
@richard1941 The Heaviside step function is not the antiderivative of a function. The Dirac delta function is not a true function in the sense of real analysis (though it can be addressed by the theory of "generalized functions").
$endgroup$
– Christian Sykes
Feb 13 at 4:48
add a comment |
1
$begingroup$
It's obvious just from the graphs that $F_2$ is not an antiderivative. At the points of discontinuity, $F_2$ has a limit of its derivative, but that's not the same thing as being differentiable at that point.
$endgroup$
– aschepler
Jan 20 at 3:56
$begingroup$
The integral function of any function is continuous period. So if you got an $F$ that wasn't continuous then it wasn't an integral. By integral I mean $int_0^x f(t) dt = F(x)$. An integral need not be differentiable though.
$endgroup$
– The Great Duck
Jan 20 at 7:19
$begingroup$
$F_1$ and $F_2$ can be made equal by adding constants, $c_i$, in each interval where $F_2$ is continuous. For instance $c_iapprox0.524$ when $xin(-0.93, 4.07)$ and so on. These $c_i$ account for the discontinuities in $f(x)$ but as long as you're not integrating over any discontinuities, $F_2$ would be valid. This is all because the antiderivative of a discontinuous function may have multiple constants of integration (even in the case of $int frac1xmathrm{d}x$).
$endgroup$
– Jam
Jan 20 at 20:10
$begingroup$
Great Duck forgets about the Heavyside impulse function.
$endgroup$
– richard1941
Jan 24 at 5:33
$begingroup$
@richard1941 The Heaviside step function is not the antiderivative of a function. The Dirac delta function is not a true function in the sense of real analysis (though it can be addressed by the theory of "generalized functions").
$endgroup$
– Christian Sykes
Feb 13 at 4:48
1
1
$begingroup$
It's obvious just from the graphs that $F_2$ is not an antiderivative. At the points of discontinuity, $F_2$ has a limit of its derivative, but that's not the same thing as being differentiable at that point.
$endgroup$
– aschepler
Jan 20 at 3:56
$begingroup$
It's obvious just from the graphs that $F_2$ is not an antiderivative. At the points of discontinuity, $F_2$ has a limit of its derivative, but that's not the same thing as being differentiable at that point.
$endgroup$
– aschepler
Jan 20 at 3:56
$begingroup$
The integral function of any function is continuous period. So if you got an $F$ that wasn't continuous then it wasn't an integral. By integral I mean $int_0^x f(t) dt = F(x)$. An integral need not be differentiable though.
$endgroup$
– The Great Duck
Jan 20 at 7:19
$begingroup$
The integral function of any function is continuous period. So if you got an $F$ that wasn't continuous then it wasn't an integral. By integral I mean $int_0^x f(t) dt = F(x)$. An integral need not be differentiable though.
$endgroup$
– The Great Duck
Jan 20 at 7:19
$begingroup$
$F_1$ and $F_2$ can be made equal by adding constants, $c_i$, in each interval where $F_2$ is continuous. For instance $c_iapprox0.524$ when $xin(-0.93, 4.07)$ and so on. These $c_i$ account for the discontinuities in $f(x)$ but as long as you're not integrating over any discontinuities, $F_2$ would be valid. This is all because the antiderivative of a discontinuous function may have multiple constants of integration (even in the case of $int frac1xmathrm{d}x$).
$endgroup$
– Jam
Jan 20 at 20:10
$begingroup$
$F_1$ and $F_2$ can be made equal by adding constants, $c_i$, in each interval where $F_2$ is continuous. For instance $c_iapprox0.524$ when $xin(-0.93, 4.07)$ and so on. These $c_i$ account for the discontinuities in $f(x)$ but as long as you're not integrating over any discontinuities, $F_2$ would be valid. This is all because the antiderivative of a discontinuous function may have multiple constants of integration (even in the case of $int frac1xmathrm{d}x$).
$endgroup$
– Jam
Jan 20 at 20:10
$begingroup$
Great Duck forgets about the Heavyside impulse function.
$endgroup$
– richard1941
Jan 24 at 5:33
$begingroup$
Great Duck forgets about the Heavyside impulse function.
$endgroup$
– richard1941
Jan 24 at 5:33
$begingroup$
@richard1941 The Heaviside step function is not the antiderivative of a function. The Dirac delta function is not a true function in the sense of real analysis (though it can be addressed by the theory of "generalized functions").
$endgroup$
– Christian Sykes
Feb 13 at 4:48
$begingroup$
@richard1941 The Heaviside step function is not the antiderivative of a function. The Dirac delta function is not a true function in the sense of real analysis (though it can be addressed by the theory of "generalized functions").
$endgroup$
– Christian Sykes
Feb 13 at 4:48
add a comment |
3 Answers
3
active
oldest
votes
$begingroup$
A differentiable function is continuous. If your "antiderivative" is not continuous, it is not an antiderivative of a continuous function.
answered Jan 19 at 16:21
Martin ArgeramiMartin Argerami
127k1182183
$endgroup$
$begingroup$
It's also worth mentioning that any integral function is also always continuous regardless of whether or not an antiderivative actually exists. Though when the antiderivative exists then the set of integral functions and antiderivatives will be one and the same.
$endgroup$
– The Great Duck
Jan 20 at 7:17
$begingroup$
Thanks Martin. That clears it up. I'll just wait the requisite additional day or so before accepting an answer. I'm curious: Is the proper phrasing to say that F2 is not differentiable, period, or can we say it is (piecewise?) differentiable on the domain x ∈ ℝ, where: x ≠ {- 2(arctan[2] + n𝜋) || - 2(cotan[2] + n𝜋)} & n ∈ ℤ? [I understand that, even if one could say the latter, it wouldn't change the fact that F2 is not an antiderivative of f.]
$endgroup$
– theorist
Jan 20 at 21:51
$begingroup$
Glad I could help. And yes, you are right. It is piecewise differentiable.
$endgroup$
– Martin Argerami
Jan 20 at 23:52
add a comment |
$begingroup$
@Martin Argerami posted a succinct and correct answer:
A differentiable function is continuous. If your "antiderivative" is
not continuous, it is not an antiderivative of a continuous function.
To elaborate, $F_2$ is not continuous due to the multi-valued nature of $arctan$. Since $tan$ is a periodic function (with a period of $pi$), this means that $arctan$ has an infinite number of values. Its plot looks like this:
To make it a proper function (one unique output value), we usually pick the primary branch (the one through the origin). However, notice that the primary branch is discontinuous at infinity - if we pass through positive infinity and come back out at negative infinity, we've jumped from $pi/2$ to $-pi/2$. What we really wanted was to move to the next branch up to preserve continuity, but to do that we'd no longer have a single valued function. We wouldn't have a function at all, really, since the common definition of function requires it to be single valued.
The discontinuities of $F_2$ are precisely where the argument of $arctan$ becomes infinite - where $2+cotfrac{x}{2}$ and $2+tanfrac{x}{2}$ become zero - approximately 4.07 and 5.36.
answered Jan 20 at 0:52
Brent BaccalaBrent Baccala
336210
$endgroup$
$begingroup$
Since we are talking about functions on the real numbers, of which $infty$ is a not a member, there no such thing as "discontinuous at infinity".
$endgroup$
– Paul Sinclair
Jan 20 at 1:35
$begingroup$
@Paul Sinclair: True, I'm playing a bit loose with that term. 3/(2+tan(x/2)) approaches negative infinity (at x=4.07), becomes indeterminate, then reappears coming in from positive infinity. Applying arctan to two minus that value, it approaches -pi/2, becomes indeterminate, then reappears decreasing from pi/2. Strictly speaking, it's a non-removable discontinuity that can be understood by looking at the limiting behavior of arctan as it approaches $pminfty$
$endgroup$
– Brent Baccala
Jan 20 at 3:21
add a comment |
$begingroup$
The top paragraph apparently has an error. The integral of f(x) dx from a to b is
F(b) - F(a), not F(a) - F(b), where F is any antiderivative of f.
answered Jan 25 at 0:18
Dr Mike EckerDr Mike Ecker
511
$endgroup$
$begingroup$
Thanks, fixed it! Though, for future reference, since this isn't an answer, according to site guidelines it should be posted as a comment on my post rather than an answer. [Stack Exchange likes to distinguish the two to maintain site readability.]
$endgroup$
– theorist
Jan 25 at 0:34
add a comment |
Your Answer
StackExchange.ifUsing("editor", function () {
return StackExchange.using("mathjaxEditing", function () {
StackExchange.MarkdownEditor.creationCallbacks.add(function (editor, postfix) {
StackExchange.mathjaxEditing.prepareWmdForMathJax(editor, postfix, [["$", "$"], ["\\(","\\)"]]);
});
});
}, "mathjax-editing");
StackExchange.ready(function() {
var channelOptions = {
tags: "".split(" "),
id: "69"
};
initTagRenderer("".split(" "), "".split(" "), channelOptions);
StackExchange.using("externalEditor", function() {
// Have to fire editor after snippets, if snippets enabled
if (StackExchange.settings.snippets.snippetsEnabled) {
StackExchange.using("snippets", function() {
createEditor();
});
}
else {
createEditor();
}
});
function createEditor() {
StackExchange.prepareEditor({
heartbeatType: 'answer',
autoActivateHeartbeat: false,
convertImagesToLinks: true,
noModals: true,
showLowRepImageUploadWarning: true,
reputationToPostImages: 10,
bindNavPrevention: true,
postfix: "",
imageUploader: {
brandingHtml: "Powered by u003ca class="icon-imgur-white" href="https://imgur.com/"u003eu003c/au003e",
contentPolicyHtml: "User contributions licensed under u003ca href="https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-sa/3.0/"u003ecc by-sa 3.0 with attribution requiredu003c/au003e u003ca href="https://stackoverflow.com/legal/content-policy"u003e(content policy)u003c/au003e",
allowUrls: true
},
noCode: true, onDemand: true,
discardSelector: ".discard-answer"
,immediatelyShowMarkdownHelp:true
});
}
});
Sign up or log in
StackExchange.ready(function () {
StackExchange.helpers.onClickDraftSave('#login-link');
});
Sign up using Google
Sign up using Facebook
Sign up using Email and Password
Post as a guest
Required, but never shown
StackExchange.ready(
function () {
StackExchange.openid.initPostLogin('.new-post-login', 'https%3a%2f%2fmath.stackexchange.com%2fquestions%2f3079520%2fevaluating-definite-integrals-using-fundamental-theorem-of-calculus%23new-answer', 'question_page');
}
);
Post as a guest
Required, but never shown
3 Answers
3
active
oldest
votes
3 Answers
3
active
oldest
votes
active
oldest
votes
active
oldest
votes
$begingroup$
A differentiable function is continuous. If your "antiderivative" is not continuous, it is not an antiderivative of a continuous function.
answered Jan 19 at 16:21
Martin ArgeramiMartin Argerami
127k1182183
$endgroup$
$begingroup$
It's also worth mentioning that any integral function is also always continuous regardless of whether or not an antiderivative actually exists. Though when the antiderivative exists then the set of integral functions and antiderivatives will be one and the same.
$endgroup$
– The Great Duck
Jan 20 at 7:17
$begingroup$
Thanks Martin. That clears it up. I'll just wait the requisite additional day or so before accepting an answer. I'm curious: Is the proper phrasing to say that F2 is not differentiable, period, or can we say it is (piecewise?) differentiable on the domain x ∈ ℝ, where: x ≠ {- 2(arctan[2] + n𝜋) || - 2(cotan[2] + n𝜋)} & n ∈ ℤ? [I understand that, even if one could say the latter, it wouldn't change the fact that F2 is not an antiderivative of f.]
$endgroup$
– theorist
Jan 20 at 21:51
$begingroup$
Glad I could help. And yes, you are right. It is piecewise differentiable.
$endgroup$
– Martin Argerami
Jan 20 at 23:52
add a comment |
$begingroup$
A differentiable function is continuous. If your "antiderivative" is not continuous, it is not an antiderivative of a continuous function.
answered Jan 19 at 16:21
Martin ArgeramiMartin Argerami
127k1182183
$endgroup$
$begingroup$
It's also worth mentioning that any integral function is also always continuous regardless of whether or not an antiderivative actually exists. Though when the antiderivative exists then the set of integral functions and antiderivatives will be one and the same.
$endgroup$
– The Great Duck
Jan 20 at 7:17
$begingroup$
Thanks Martin. That clears it up. I'll just wait the requisite additional day or so before accepting an answer. I'm curious: Is the proper phrasing to say that F2 is not differentiable, period, or can we say it is (piecewise?) differentiable on the domain x ∈ ℝ, where: x ≠ {- 2(arctan[2] + n𝜋) || - 2(cotan[2] + n𝜋)} & n ∈ ℤ? [I understand that, even if one could say the latter, it wouldn't change the fact that F2 is not an antiderivative of f.]
$endgroup$
– theorist
Jan 20 at 21:51
$begingroup$
Glad I could help. And yes, you are right. It is piecewise differentiable.
$endgroup$
– Martin Argerami
Jan 20 at 23:52
add a comment |
$begingroup$
A differentiable function is continuous. If your "antiderivative" is not continuous, it is not an antiderivative of a continuous function.
answered Jan 19 at 16:21
Martin ArgeramiMartin Argerami
127k1182183
$endgroup$
A differentiable function is continuous. If your "antiderivative" is not continuous, it is not an antiderivative of a continuous function.
answered Jan 19 at 16:21
Martin ArgeramiMartin Argerami
127k1182183
answered Jan 19 at 16:21
Martin ArgeramiMartin Argerami
127k1182183
answered Jan 19 at 16:21
Martin ArgeramiMartin Argerami
127k1182183
answered Jan 19 at 16:21
Martin ArgeramiMartin Argerami
127k1182183
127k1182183
$begingroup$
It's also worth mentioning that any integral function is also always continuous regardless of whether or not an antiderivative actually exists. Though when the antiderivative exists then the set of integral functions and antiderivatives will be one and the same.
$endgroup$
– The Great Duck
Jan 20 at 7:17
$begingroup$
Thanks Martin. That clears it up. I'll just wait the requisite additional day or so before accepting an answer. I'm curious: Is the proper phrasing to say that F2 is not differentiable, period, or can we say it is (piecewise?) differentiable on the domain x ∈ ℝ, where: x ≠ {- 2(arctan[2] + n𝜋) || - 2(cotan[2] + n𝜋)} & n ∈ ℤ? [I understand that, even if one could say the latter, it wouldn't change the fact that F2 is not an antiderivative of f.]
$endgroup$
– theorist
Jan 20 at 21:51
$begingroup$
Glad I could help. And yes, you are right. It is piecewise differentiable.
$endgroup$
– Martin Argerami
Jan 20 at 23:52
add a comment |
$begingroup$
It's also worth mentioning that any integral function is also always continuous regardless of whether or not an antiderivative actually exists. Though when the antiderivative exists then the set of integral functions and antiderivatives will be one and the same.
$endgroup$
– The Great Duck
Jan 20 at 7:17
$begingroup$
Thanks Martin. That clears it up. I'll just wait the requisite additional day or so before accepting an answer. I'm curious: Is the proper phrasing to say that F2 is not differentiable, period, or can we say it is (piecewise?) differentiable on the domain x ∈ ℝ, where: x ≠ {- 2(arctan[2] + n𝜋) || - 2(cotan[2] + n𝜋)} & n ∈ ℤ? [I understand that, even if one could say the latter, it wouldn't change the fact that F2 is not an antiderivative of f.]
$endgroup$
– theorist
Jan 20 at 21:51
$begingroup$
Glad I could help. And yes, you are right. It is piecewise differentiable.
$endgroup$
– Martin Argerami
Jan 20 at 23:52
$begingroup$
It's also worth mentioning that any integral function is also always continuous regardless of whether or not an antiderivative actually exists. Though when the antiderivative exists then the set of integral functions and antiderivatives will be one and the same.
$endgroup$
– The Great Duck
Jan 20 at 7:17
$begingroup$
It's also worth mentioning that any integral function is also always continuous regardless of whether or not an antiderivative actually exists. Though when the antiderivative exists then the set of integral functions and antiderivatives will be one and the same.
$endgroup$
– The Great Duck
Jan 20 at 7:17
$begingroup$
Thanks Martin. That clears it up. I'll just wait the requisite additional day or so before accepting an answer. I'm curious: Is the proper phrasing to say that F2 is not differentiable, period, or can we say it is (piecewise?) differentiable on the domain x ∈ ℝ, where: x ≠ {- 2(arctan[2] + n𝜋) || - 2(cotan[2] + n𝜋)} & n ∈ ℤ? [I understand that, even if one could say the latter, it wouldn't change the fact that F2 is not an antiderivative of f.]
$endgroup$
– theorist
Jan 20 at 21:51
$begingroup$
Thanks Martin. That clears it up. I'll just wait the requisite additional day or so before accepting an answer. I'm curious: Is the proper phrasing to say that F2 is not differentiable, period, or can we say it is (piecewise?) differentiable on the domain x ∈ ℝ, where: x ≠ {- 2(arctan[2] + n𝜋) || - 2(cotan[2] + n𝜋)} & n ∈ ℤ? [I understand that, even if one could say the latter, it wouldn't change the fact that F2 is not an antiderivative of f.]
$endgroup$
– theorist
Jan 20 at 21:51
$begingroup$
Glad I could help. And yes, you are right. It is piecewise differentiable.
$endgroup$
– Martin Argerami
Jan 20 at 23:52
$begingroup$
Glad I could help. And yes, you are right. It is piecewise differentiable.
$endgroup$
– Martin Argerami
Jan 20 at 23:52
add a comment |
$begingroup$
@Martin Argerami posted a succinct and correct answer:
A differentiable function is continuous. If your "antiderivative" is
not continuous, it is not an antiderivative of a continuous function.
To elaborate, $F_2$ is not continuous due to the multi-valued nature of $arctan$. Since $tan$ is a periodic function (with a period of $pi$), this means that $arctan$ has an infinite number of values. Its plot looks like this:
To make it a proper function (one unique output value), we usually pick the primary branch (the one through the origin). However, notice that the primary branch is discontinuous at infinity - if we pass through positive infinity and come back out at negative infinity, we've jumped from $pi/2$ to $-pi/2$. What we really wanted was to move to the next branch up to preserve continuity, but to do that we'd no longer have a single valued function. We wouldn't have a function at all, really, since the common definition of function requires it to be single valued.
The discontinuities of $F_2$ are precisely where the argument of $arctan$ becomes infinite - where $2+cotfrac{x}{2}$ and $2+tanfrac{x}{2}$ become zero - approximately 4.07 and 5.36.
answered Jan 20 at 0:52
Brent BaccalaBrent Baccala
336210
$endgroup$
$begingroup$
Since we are talking about functions on the real numbers, of which $infty$ is a not a member, there no such thing as "discontinuous at infinity".
$endgroup$
– Paul Sinclair
Jan 20 at 1:35
$begingroup$
@Paul Sinclair: True, I'm playing a bit loose with that term. 3/(2+tan(x/2)) approaches negative infinity (at x=4.07), becomes indeterminate, then reappears coming in from positive infinity. Applying arctan to two minus that value, it approaches -pi/2, becomes indeterminate, then reappears decreasing from pi/2. Strictly speaking, it's a non-removable discontinuity that can be understood by looking at the limiting behavior of arctan as it approaches $pminfty$
$endgroup$
– Brent Baccala
Jan 20 at 3:21
add a comment |
$begingroup$
@Martin Argerami posted a succinct and correct answer:
A differentiable function is continuous. If your "antiderivative" is
not continuous, it is not an antiderivative of a continuous function.
To elaborate, $F_2$ is not continuous due to the multi-valued nature of $arctan$. Since $tan$ is a periodic function (with a period of $pi$), this means that $arctan$ has an infinite number of values. Its plot looks like this:
To make it a proper function (one unique output value), we usually pick the primary branch (the one through the origin). However, notice that the primary branch is discontinuous at infinity - if we pass through positive infinity and come back out at negative infinity, we've jumped from $pi/2$ to $-pi/2$. What we really wanted was to move to the next branch up to preserve continuity, but to do that we'd no longer have a single valued function. We wouldn't have a function at all, really, since the common definition of function requires it to be single valued.
The discontinuities of $F_2$ are precisely where the argument of $arctan$ becomes infinite - where $2+cotfrac{x}{2}$ and $2+tanfrac{x}{2}$ become zero - approximately 4.07 and 5.36.
answered Jan 20 at 0:52
Brent BaccalaBrent Baccala
336210
$endgroup$
$begingroup$
Since we are talking about functions on the real numbers, of which $infty$ is a not a member, there no such thing as "discontinuous at infinity".
$endgroup$
– Paul Sinclair
Jan 20 at 1:35
$begingroup$
@Paul Sinclair: True, I'm playing a bit loose with that term. 3/(2+tan(x/2)) approaches negative infinity (at x=4.07), becomes indeterminate, then reappears coming in from positive infinity. Applying arctan to two minus that value, it approaches -pi/2, becomes indeterminate, then reappears decreasing from pi/2. Strictly speaking, it's a non-removable discontinuity that can be understood by looking at the limiting behavior of arctan as it approaches $pminfty$
$endgroup$
– Brent Baccala
Jan 20 at 3:21
add a comment |
$begingroup$
@Martin Argerami posted a succinct and correct answer:
A differentiable function is continuous. If your "antiderivative" is
not continuous, it is not an antiderivative of a continuous function.
To elaborate, $F_2$ is not continuous due to the multi-valued nature of $arctan$. Since $tan$ is a periodic function (with a period of $pi$), this means that $arctan$ has an infinite number of values. Its plot looks like this:
To make it a proper function (one unique output value), we usually pick the primary branch (the one through the origin). However, notice that the primary branch is discontinuous at infinity - if we pass through positive infinity and come back out at negative infinity, we've jumped from $pi/2$ to $-pi/2$. What we really wanted was to move to the next branch up to preserve continuity, but to do that we'd no longer have a single valued function. We wouldn't have a function at all, really, since the common definition of function requires it to be single valued.
The discontinuities of $F_2$ are precisely where the argument of $arctan$ becomes infinite - where $2+cotfrac{x}{2}$ and $2+tanfrac{x}{2}$ become zero - approximately 4.07 and 5.36.
answered Jan 20 at 0:52
Brent BaccalaBrent Baccala
336210
$endgroup$
@Martin Argerami posted a succinct and correct answer:
A differentiable function is continuous. If your "antiderivative" is
not continuous, it is not an antiderivative of a continuous function.
To elaborate, $F_2$ is not continuous due to the multi-valued nature of $arctan$. Since $tan$ is a periodic function (with a period of $pi$), this means that $arctan$ has an infinite number of values. Its plot looks like this:
To make it a proper function (one unique output value), we usually pick the primary branch (the one through the origin). However, notice that the primary branch is discontinuous at infinity - if we pass through positive infinity and come back out at negative infinity, we've jumped from $pi/2$ to $-pi/2$. What we really wanted was to move to the next branch up to preserve continuity, but to do that we'd no longer have a single valued function. We wouldn't have a function at all, really, since the common definition of function requires it to be single valued.
The discontinuities of $F_2$ are precisely where the argument of $arctan$ becomes infinite - where $2+cotfrac{x}{2}$ and $2+tanfrac{x}{2}$ become zero - approximately 4.07 and 5.36.
answered Jan 20 at 0:52
Brent BaccalaBrent Baccala
336210
answered Jan 20 at 0:52
Brent BaccalaBrent Baccala
336210
answered Jan 20 at 0:52
Brent BaccalaBrent Baccala
336210
answered Jan 20 at 0:52
Brent BaccalaBrent Baccala
336210
336210
$begingroup$
Since we are talking about functions on the real numbers, of which $infty$ is a not a member, there no such thing as "discontinuous at infinity".
$endgroup$
– Paul Sinclair
Jan 20 at 1:35
$begingroup$
@Paul Sinclair: True, I'm playing a bit loose with that term. 3/(2+tan(x/2)) approaches negative infinity (at x=4.07), becomes indeterminate, then reappears coming in from positive infinity. Applying arctan to two minus that value, it approaches -pi/2, becomes indeterminate, then reappears decreasing from pi/2. Strictly speaking, it's a non-removable discontinuity that can be understood by looking at the limiting behavior of arctan as it approaches $pminfty$
$endgroup$
– Brent Baccala
Jan 20 at 3:21
add a comment |
$begingroup$
Since we are talking about functions on the real numbers, of which $infty$ is a not a member, there no such thing as "discontinuous at infinity".
$endgroup$
– Paul Sinclair
Jan 20 at 1:35
$begingroup$
@Paul Sinclair: True, I'm playing a bit loose with that term. 3/(2+tan(x/2)) approaches negative infinity (at x=4.07), becomes indeterminate, then reappears coming in from positive infinity. Applying arctan to two minus that value, it approaches -pi/2, becomes indeterminate, then reappears decreasing from pi/2. Strictly speaking, it's a non-removable discontinuity that can be understood by looking at the limiting behavior of arctan as it approaches $pminfty$
$endgroup$
– Brent Baccala
Jan 20 at 3:21
$begingroup$
Since we are talking about functions on the real numbers, of which $infty$ is a not a member, there no such thing as "discontinuous at infinity".
$endgroup$
– Paul Sinclair
Jan 20 at 1:35
$begingroup$
Since we are talking about functions on the real numbers, of which $infty$ is a not a member, there no such thing as "discontinuous at infinity".
$endgroup$
– Paul Sinclair
Jan 20 at 1:35
$begingroup$
@Paul Sinclair: True, I'm playing a bit loose with that term. 3/(2+tan(x/2)) approaches negative infinity (at x=4.07), becomes indeterminate, then reappears coming in from positive infinity. Applying arctan to two minus that value, it approaches -pi/2, becomes indeterminate, then reappears decreasing from pi/2. Strictly speaking, it's a non-removable discontinuity that can be understood by looking at the limiting behavior of arctan as it approaches $pminfty$
$endgroup$
– Brent Baccala
Jan 20 at 3:21
$begingroup$
@Paul Sinclair: True, I'm playing a bit loose with that term. 3/(2+tan(x/2)) approaches negative infinity (at x=4.07), becomes indeterminate, then reappears coming in from positive infinity. Applying arctan to two minus that value, it approaches -pi/2, becomes indeterminate, then reappears decreasing from pi/2. Strictly speaking, it's a non-removable discontinuity that can be understood by looking at the limiting behavior of arctan as it approaches $pminfty$
$endgroup$
– Brent Baccala
Jan 20 at 3:21
add a comment |
$begingroup$
The top paragraph apparently has an error. The integral of f(x) dx from a to b is
F(b) - F(a), not F(a) - F(b), where F is any antiderivative of f.
answered Jan 25 at 0:18
Dr Mike EckerDr Mike Ecker
511
$endgroup$
$begingroup$
Thanks, fixed it! Though, for future reference, since this isn't an answer, according to site guidelines it should be posted as a comment on my post rather than an answer. [Stack Exchange likes to distinguish the two to maintain site readability.]
$endgroup$
– theorist
Jan 25 at 0:34
add a comment |
$begingroup$
The top paragraph apparently has an error. The integral of f(x) dx from a to b is
F(b) - F(a), not F(a) - F(b), where F is any antiderivative of f.
answered Jan 25 at 0:18
Dr Mike EckerDr Mike Ecker
511
$endgroup$
$begingroup$
Thanks, fixed it! Though, for future reference, since this isn't an answer, according to site guidelines it should be posted as a comment on my post rather than an answer. [Stack Exchange likes to distinguish the two to maintain site readability.]
$endgroup$
– theorist
Jan 25 at 0:34
add a comment |
$begingroup$
The top paragraph apparently has an error. The integral of f(x) dx from a to b is
F(b) - F(a), not F(a) - F(b), where F is any antiderivative of f.
answered Jan 25 at 0:18
Dr Mike EckerDr Mike Ecker
511
$endgroup$
The top paragraph apparently has an error. The integral of f(x) dx from a to b is
F(b) - F(a), not F(a) - F(b), where F is any antiderivative of f.
answered Jan 25 at 0:18
Dr Mike EckerDr Mike Ecker
511
answered Jan 25 at 0:18
Dr Mike EckerDr Mike Ecker
511
answered Jan 25 at 0:18
Dr Mike EckerDr Mike Ecker
511
answered Jan 25 at 0:18
Dr Mike EckerDr Mike Ecker
511
511
$begingroup$
Thanks, fixed it! Though, for future reference, since this isn't an answer, according to site guidelines it should be posted as a comment on my post rather than an answer. [Stack Exchange likes to distinguish the two to maintain site readability.]
$endgroup$
– theorist
Jan 25 at 0:34
add a comment |
$begingroup$
Thanks, fixed it! Though, for future reference, since this isn't an answer, according to site guidelines it should be posted as a comment on my post rather than an answer. [Stack Exchange likes to distinguish the two to maintain site readability.]
$endgroup$
– theorist
Jan 25 at 0:34
$begingroup$
Thanks, fixed it! Though, for future reference, since this isn't an answer, according to site guidelines it should be posted as a comment on my post rather than an answer. [Stack Exchange likes to distinguish the two to maintain site readability.]
$endgroup$
– theorist
Jan 25 at 0:34
$begingroup$
Thanks, fixed it! Though, for future reference, since this isn't an answer, according to site guidelines it should be posted as a comment on my post rather than an answer. [Stack Exchange likes to distinguish the two to maintain site readability.]
$endgroup$
– theorist
Jan 25 at 0:34
add a comment |
Thanks for contributing an answer to Mathematics Stack Exchange!
- Please be sure to answer the question. Provide details and share your research!
But avoid …
- Asking for help, clarification, or responding to other answers.
- Making statements based on opinion; back them up with references or personal experience.
Use MathJax to format equations. MathJax reference.
To learn more, see our tips on writing great answers.
Sign up or log in
StackExchange.ready(function () {
StackExchange.helpers.onClickDraftSave('#login-link');
});
Sign up using Google
Sign up using Facebook
Sign up using Email and Password
Post as a guest
Required, but never shown
StackExchange.ready(
function () {
StackExchange.openid.initPostLogin('.new-post-login', 'https%3a%2f%2fmath.stackexchange.com%2fquestions%2f3079520%2fevaluating-definite-integrals-using-fundamental-theorem-of-calculus%23new-answer', 'question_page');
}
);
Post as a guest
Required, but never shown
Sign up or log in
StackExchange.ready(function () {
StackExchange.helpers.onClickDraftSave('#login-link');
});
Sign up using Google
Sign up using Facebook
Sign up using Email and Password
Post as a guest
Required, but never shown
Sign up or log in
StackExchange.ready(function () {
StackExchange.helpers.onClickDraftSave('#login-link');
});
Sign up using Google
Sign up using Facebook
Sign up using Email and Password
Post as a guest
Required, but never shown
Sign up or log in
StackExchange.ready(function () {
StackExchange.helpers.onClickDraftSave('#login-link');
});
Sign up using Google
Sign up using Facebook
Sign up using Email and Password
Sign up using Google
Sign up using Facebook
Sign up using Email and Password
Post as a guest
Required, but never shown
Required, but never shown
Required, but never shown
Required, but never shown
Required, but never shown
Required, but never shown
Required, but never shown
Required, but never shown
Required, but never shown
1
$begingroup$
It's obvious just from the graphs that $F_2$ is not an antiderivative. At the points of discontinuity, $F_2$ has a limit of its derivative, but that's not the same thing as being differentiable at that point.
$endgroup$
– aschepler
Jan 20 at 3:56
$begingroup$
The integral function of any function is continuous period. So if you got an $F$ that wasn't continuous then it wasn't an integral. By integral I mean $int_0^x f(t) dt = F(x)$. An integral need not be differentiable though.
$endgroup$
– The Great Duck
Jan 20 at 7:19
$begingroup$
$F_1$ and $F_2$ can be made equal by adding constants, $c_i$, in each interval where $F_2$ is continuous. For instance $c_iapprox0.524$ when $xin(-0.93, 4.07)$ and so on. These $c_i$ account for the discontinuities in $f(x)$ but as long as you're not integrating over any discontinuities, $F_2$ would be valid. This is all because the antiderivative of a discontinuous function may have multiple constants of integration (even in the case of $int frac1xmathrm{d}x$).
$endgroup$
– Jam
Jan 20 at 20:10
$begingroup$
Great Duck forgets about the Heavyside impulse function.
$endgroup$
– richard1941
Jan 24 at 5:33
$begingroup$
@richard1941 The Heaviside step function is not the antiderivative of a function. The Dirac delta function is not a true function in the sense of real analysis (though it can be addressed by the theory of "generalized functions").
$endgroup$
– Christian Sykes
Feb 13 at 4:48