MedVision ad

Improper integrals (1 Viewer)

leehuan

Well-Known Member
Joined
May 31, 2014
Messages
5,805
Gender
Male
HSC
2015


The answer is obviously that it does not, but I want to check if my proof is flawed.







I have a feeling I may have needed to consider the negative infinity portion of this integral?
 
Last edited:

InteGrand

Well-Known Member
Joined
Dec 11, 2014
Messages
6,109
Gender
Male
HSC
N/A


The answer is obviously that it does not, but I want to check if my proof is flawed.







I have a feeling I may have needed to consider the negative infinity portion of this integral?
The Cauchy principal value would be 0. Otherwise it's an undefined expression -inf + inf.

Don't need to use any comparison tests, we can find an antiderivative using inspection or a u-substitution.
 
Last edited:

Paradoxica

-insert title here-
Joined
Jun 19, 2014
Messages
2,556
Location
Outside reality
Gender
Male
HSC
2016


The answer is obviously that it does not, but I want to check if my proof is flawed.







I have a feeling I may have needed to consider the negative infinity portion of this integral?
Does it make sense to ask convergence of an integral whose CPV is 0?

In any case, you can reduce the two cases to one by using the parity of the function to your advantage.
 

leehuan

Well-Known Member
Joined
May 31, 2014
Messages
5,805
Gender
Male
HSC
2015
They didn't teach us about the Cauchy principal value. I only found that on WolframAlpha.

Edit: Though they did make us evaluate this
 
Last edited:

leehuan

Well-Known Member
Joined
May 31, 2014
Messages
5,805
Gender
Male
HSC
2015
Bit of guidance needed here.

 
Last edited:

leehuan

Well-Known Member
Joined
May 31, 2014
Messages
5,805
Gender
Male
HSC
2015

(I know this is the Gamma function)

I had an idea but then I got lost. My last step was rewriting the integral as

 
Last edited:

InteGrand

Well-Known Member
Joined
Dec 11, 2014
Messages
6,109
Gender
Male
HSC
N/A

(I know this is the Gamma function)

I had an idea but then I got lost. My last step was rewriting the integral as

The -t in the exponential should become -1/x , rather than 1/x.
 
Last edited:

Drongoski

Well-Known Member
Joined
Feb 22, 2009
Messages
4,255
Gender
Male
HSC
N/A
In transformed integral: ??


ps
InteGrand beaten me to it.
 

seanieg89

Well-Known Member
Joined
Aug 8, 2006
Messages
2,662
Gender
Male
HSC
2007
So you have the integrand and we want to show it is integrable on the non-negative reals.

The behaviour near zero is not a problem at all, since as (essentially because exponentials dominate polynomials, there are many ways you could justify this). So it suffices to check that g be integrable on .

This follows by comparison to . (In fact we can use this argument to show that the integral is convergent if and ONLY if ).
 

leehuan

Well-Known Member
Joined
May 31, 2014
Messages
5,805
Gender
Male
HSC
2015
Having already shown



The method the answers provided is not immediately obvious to me and I don't understand the lateral thinking required. Can someone please explain the intuition required to see this method or just provide an easier pathway?



 

InteGrand

Well-Known Member
Joined
Dec 11, 2014
Messages
6,109
Gender
Male
HSC
N/A
Having already shown



The method the answers provided is not immediately obvious to me and I don't understand the lateral thinking required. Can someone please explain the intuition required to see this method or just provide an easier pathway?



Yeah it's essentially a comparison test.

For all t large enough, the integrand in the second integral is greater than the first (since t^2 + t > 2t for all t large enough, say all t > 1).

Since the former integral taken from 1 to oo diverges to +oo (from previous part of Q.), by the comparison test, so does the latter one when taken from 1 to oo.

And remembering the finite lower limit here is irrelevant since the integrand is continuous, we're done.
 

Users Who Are Viewing This Thread (Users: 0, Guests: 1)

Top