MedVision ad

HSC 2015 MX2 Integration Marathon (archive) (3 Viewers)

Status
Not open for further replies.

Ekman

Well-Known Member
Joined
Oct 23, 2014
Messages
1,615
Gender
Male
HSC
2015
Re: MX2 2015 Integration Marathon

How'd you get the first integral to be equal to the 2nd one?
3U factorisation, and the cancellation of factors of both numerator and denominator
For the second line, I used partial fractions, and the rest is pretty straightforward.
 
Last edited:

VBN2470

Well-Known Member
Joined
Mar 13, 2012
Messages
440
Location
Sydney
Gender
Male
HSC
2013
Uni Grad
2017
Re: MX2 2015 Integration Marathon

NEW QUESTION:

 

VBN2470

Well-Known Member
Joined
Mar 13, 2012
Messages
440
Location
Sydney
Gender
Male
HSC
2013
Uni Grad
2017
Re: MX2 2015 Integration Marathon

NEW QUESTION

 
Last edited:

Ekman

Well-Known Member
Joined
Oct 23, 2014
Messages
1,615
Gender
Male
HSC
2015
Re: MX2 2015 Integration Marathon

He just used the substitution u = -x to obtain the result. I think he skipped some of the steps due to cbf typing on LaTeX.
I understood the substitution to get this:


But what I don't get is how you could draw a conclusion to:
 

InteGrand

Well-Known Member
Joined
Dec 11, 2014
Messages
6,109
Gender
Male
HSC
N/A
Re: MX2 2015 Integration Marathon

I understood the substitution to get this:


But what I don't get is how you could draw a conclusion to:
You can also think of it graphically: replacing with has the effect of flipping the graph about the y-axis, so keeping the bounds at -1 to +1 while flipping the graph means the area under the curve is the same.
 

Ekman

Well-Known Member
Joined
Oct 23, 2014
Messages
1,615
Gender
Male
HSC
2015
Re: MX2 2015 Integration Marathon

You can also think of it graphically: replacing with has the effect of flipping the graph about the y-axis, so keeping the bounds at -1 to +1 while flipping the graph means the area under the curve is the same.
Any way of showing it algebraically?
 

VBN2470

Well-Known Member
Joined
Mar 13, 2012
Messages
440
Location
Sydney
Gender
Male
HSC
2013
Uni Grad
2017
Re: MX2 2015 Integration Marathon

I understood the substitution to get this:


But what I don't get is how you could draw a conclusion to:
Oh, I see. Basically for any definite integral, it doesn't matter what our variable is, whether it is t or x or even u, since we have just assigned a name to it, so (see how it doesn't matter if it is t or x, the value remains the same, think of it as being like a 'dummy' variable.
 

Ekman

Well-Known Member
Joined
Oct 23, 2014
Messages
1,615
Gender
Male
HSC
2015
Re: MX2 2015 Integration Marathon

Oh, I see. Basically for any definite integral, it doesn't matter what our variable is, whether it is t or x or even u, since we have just assigned a name to it, so (see how it doesn't matter if it is t or x, the value remains the same, think of it as being like a 'dummy' variable.
So then this would only work for cases when there are definite integrals?
 

VBN2470

Well-Known Member
Joined
Mar 13, 2012
Messages
440
Location
Sydney
Gender
Male
HSC
2013
Uni Grad
2017
Re: MX2 2015 Integration Marathon

So then this would only work for cases when there are definite integrals?
For the indefinite case, if there is a substitution, it won't really work then you would need to be careful with the variables presented. The definite integral is always independent of the variable of integration, so it doesn't matter even if you use a substitution, you will end up getting the same value. Again, it just comes down to the naming of the variables, the mathematical argument is still retained.
 
Last edited:

InteGrand

Well-Known Member
Joined
Dec 11, 2014
Messages
6,109
Gender
Male
HSC
N/A
Re: MX2 2015 Integration Marathon

NEW QUESTION

This one seems dodgy lol. For one thing, the cos 2x under the square root in the denominator goes negative at some points in the domain...
 
Status
Not open for further replies.

Users Who Are Viewing This Thread (Users: 0, Guests: 3)

Top