Editing 2117: Differentiation and Integration
Warning: You are not logged in. Your IP address will be publicly visible if you make any edits. If you log in or create an account, your edits will be attributed to your username, along with other benefits.
The edit can be undone.
Please check the comparison below to verify that this is what you want to do, and then save the changes below to finish undoing the edit.
Latest revision | Your text | ||
Line 8: | Line 8: | ||
==Explanation== | ==Explanation== | ||
− | This comic | + | {{incomplete|Created by a BESSEL FUNCTION? Please mention here why this explanation isn't complete. Do NOT delete this tag too soon.}} |
+ | This comic provides a {{w|flowchart}} purporting to show the process of differentiation, and another for integration. | ||
{{w|Derivative|Differentiation}} and {{w|Antiderivative|Integration}} are two major components of {{w|calculus}}. As many Calculus 2 students are painfully aware, integration is much more complicated than the differentiation it undoes. | {{w|Derivative|Differentiation}} and {{w|Antiderivative|Integration}} are two major components of {{w|calculus}}. As many Calculus 2 students are painfully aware, integration is much more complicated than the differentiation it undoes. | ||
− | However, Randall dramatically overstates this point here. After the first step of integration, Randall assumes that any integration can not be solved so simply, and then dives into a step named "????", suggesting that it is unknowable how to proceed. The rest of the flowchart is (we can assume deliberately) even harder to follow, and does not reach a conclusion. This is in contrast to the simple, straightforward flowchart for differentiation. The fact that the arrows in the bottom of the integration part leads to nowhere indicates that "Phone calls to mathematicians", "Oh no" and "Burn the evidence" are not final steps in the difficult journey. The flowchart could be extended by Randall to God- | + | However, Randall dramatically overstates this point here. After the first step of integration, Randall assumes that any integration can not be solved so simply, and then dives into a step named "????", suggesting that it is unknowable how to proceed. The rest of the flowchart is (we can assume deliberately) even harder to follow, and does not reach a conclusion. This is in contrast to the simple, straightforward flowchart for differentiation. The fact that the arrows in the bottom of the integration part leads to nowhere indicates that "Phone calls to mathematicians", "Oh no" and "Burn the evidence" are not final steps in the difficult journey. The flowchart could be extended by Randall to God-know-where extents. |
− | It should be noted that Randall slightly undermines his point by providing four different methods, and an "etc", | + | It should be noted that Randall slightly undermines his point by providing four different methods, and an "etc", for attempting differentiation with no guidelines for selecting between them. |
===Differentiation=== | ===Differentiation=== | ||
'''{{w|Chain rule}}''' | '''{{w|Chain rule}}''' | ||
− | For any <math> \frac{d}{dx}f(x)=f'(x)</math> and <math> \frac{d}{dx}g(x)=g'(x) </math>, it follows that <math> \frac{d}{dx}(f(g(x)))=f'(g(x)) | + | For any <math> \frac{d}{dx}f(x)=f'(x)</math> and <math> \frac{d}{dx}g(x)=g'(x) </math>, it follows that <math> \frac{d}{dx}(f(g(x)))=f'(g(x))*g'(x)</math>. |
'''{{w|Power Rule}}''' | '''{{w|Power Rule}}''' | ||
− | For any <math> f(x)= | + | For any <math> f(x)=x^a </math>, it follows that <math> \frac{d}{dx}f(x)=a*x^{a-1} </math>. |
'''{{w|Quotient rule}}''' | '''{{w|Quotient rule}}''' | ||
− | For any <math> \frac{d}{dx}f(x)=f'(x)</math> and <math> \frac{d}{dx}g(x)=g'(x) </math>, it follows that <math> \frac{d}{dx} \frac{f(x)}{g(x)}=\frac{f'(x) | + | For any <math> \frac{d}{dx}f(x)=f'(x)</math> and <math> \frac{d}{dx}g(x)=g'(x) </math>, it follows that <math> \frac{d}{dx} \frac{f(x)}{g(x)}=\frac{f'(x)g(x)-f(x)g'(x)}{(g(x))^2}</math> if <math>g(x)\ne 0</math>. |
'''{{w|Product rule}}''' | '''{{w|Product rule}}''' | ||
− | For any <math> \frac{d}{dx}f(x)=f'(x)</math> and <math> \frac{d}{dx}g(x)=g'(x) </math>, it follows that <math> \frac{d}{dx}(f(x) | + | For any <math> \frac{d}{dx}f(x)=f'(x)</math> and <math> \frac{d}{dx}g(x)=g'(x) </math>, it follows that <math> \frac{d}{dx}(f(x)*g(x))=f'(x)*g(x)+f(x)*g'(x)</math>. |
===Integration=== | ===Integration=== | ||
'''{{w|Integration by parts}}''' | '''{{w|Integration by parts}}''' | ||
− | The "product rule" run backwards. Since <math>(uv)' = uv' + u'v</math>, it follows that by integrating both sides you get <math> uv = \int u dv + \int v du</math>, which is more commonly written as <math>\int u dv = uv - \int v du</math>. By finding appropriate values for functions <math>u, v</math> such that your problem is in the form <math>\int u dv</math>, your problem ''may'' be simplified | + | The "product rule" run backwards. Since <math>(uv)' = uv' + u'v</math>, it follows that by integrating both sides you get <math> uv = \int u dv + \int v du</math>, which is more commonly written as <math>\int u dv = uv - \int v du</math>. By finding appropriate values for functions <math>u, v</math> such that your problem is in the form <math>\int u dv</math>, your problem ''may'' be simplified. |
'''{{w|Integration by substitution|Substitution}}''' | '''{{w|Integration by substitution|Substitution}}''' | ||
Line 44: | Line 45: | ||
'''{{w|Cauchy's integral formula|Cauchy's Formula}}''' | '''{{w|Cauchy's integral formula|Cauchy's Formula}}''' | ||
− | Cauchy's Integral formula is a result in complex analysis that relates the value of a contour integral in the complex plane to properties of the singularities in the interior of the contour. | + | Cauchy's Integral formula is a result in complex analysis that relates the value of a contour integral in the complex plane to properties of the singularities in the interior of the contour. It is often used to compute integrals on the real line by extending the path of the integral from the real line into the complex plane to apply the formula, then proving that the integral from the parts of the contour not on the real line has value zero. |
'''{{w|Partial_fraction_decomposition#Application_to_symbolic_integration|Partial Fractions}}''' | '''{{w|Partial_fraction_decomposition#Application_to_symbolic_integration|Partial Fractions}}''' | ||
Line 50: | Line 51: | ||
Partial fractions is a technique for breaking up a function that comprises one polynomial divided by another into a sum of functions comprising constants over the factors of the original denominator, which can easily be integrated into logarithms. | Partial fractions is a technique for breaking up a function that comprises one polynomial divided by another into a sum of functions comprising constants over the factors of the original denominator, which can easily be integrated into logarithms. | ||
− | ''' | + | '''{{w|Install Mathematica}}''' |
− | Mathematica is a modern technical computing system spanning most areas. One of its features is to compute mathematical functions. This step in the flowchart is | + | {{w|Mathematica}} is a modern technical computing system spanning most areas. One of its features is to compute mathematical functions. This step in the flowchart is install and use Mathematica to compute to do the integration for you. |
'''{{w|Riemann integral|Riemann Integration}}''' | '''{{w|Riemann integral|Riemann Integration}}''' | ||
+ | The Riemann integral is a definition of definite integration. Elementary textbooks on calculus sometimes present finding a definite integral as a process of approximating an area by strips of equal width and then taking the limit as the strips become narrower. Riemann integration removes the requirement that the strips have equal width, and so is a more flexible definition. However there are still many functions for which the Riemann integral doesn't converge, and consideration of these functions leads to the Lesbegue Integral. Riemann integration is not a method of calculus appropriate for finding the anti-derivative of an elementary function. | ||
− | + | '''{{w|Stokes' Theorem}}''' | |
− | + | Stokes' theorem relates a surface integral of a the curl of the vector field to a line integral of the vector field around the boundary of the surface. If you're in this deep, there's a good chance that you're just randomly applying any analytical technique you can think of at this point. | |
− | '''{{w|Stokes' Theorem}}''' | ||
− | |||
− | Stokes' theorem | ||
'''{{w|Risch Algorithm}}''' | '''{{w|Risch Algorithm}}''' | ||
− | + | The Risch Algorithm is a complex procedure that reduces the process of symbolic integration to purely algebraic steps. It is implemented in Computer Algebra software, such as Mathematica. A human would have to be pretty desperate to attempt this (presumably) by hand. | |
− | The Risch | ||
'''{{w|Bessel function}}''' | '''{{w|Bessel function}}''' | ||
− | + | Bessel functions are the solution to the differential equation <math> x^2 \frac{dy^2}{dx^2}+x \frac{dy}{dx}+(x^2-n^2)*y=0</math>, where n is the order of Bessel function. Though they do show up in some engineering, physics, and abstract mathematics, in lower levels of calculus they are often a sign that the integration was not set up properly before someone put them into a symbolic algebra solver. | |
− | Bessel functions are the solution to the differential equation <math> x^2 \frac{ | ||
− | |||
− | |||
− | |||
− | |||
− | |||
− | |||
− | |||
− | |||
− | |||
'''{{w|Symbolic integration}}''' | '''{{w|Symbolic integration}}''' | ||
+ | Symbolic algebra is the basic process of finding an antiderivative, as opposed to numerically integrating a function. Randall plays off the joke that integration might as well be a symbol, like in a novel, because he can't get any meaningful results from his analysis. | ||
− | + | ''' Burn the evidence ''' | |
+ | This phrase parodies a common trope in detective fiction, where characters burn notes, receipts, passports, etc. to maintain secrecy. This may refer to the burning of one's work to avoid the shame of being associated w/ such a badly failed attempt to solve the given integration problem. | ||
+ | Alternatively, this could be an ironic hint to the fact that in order to find the integral, it may even be necessary to break the law or upset higher powers, so that the negative consequences of a persecution can only be avoided by destroying the evidence. | ||
==Transcript== | ==Transcript== | ||
+ | {{incomplete transcript|Do NOT delete this tag too soon.}} | ||
:[Two flow charts are shown.] | :[Two flow charts are shown.] | ||
Line 96: | Line 88: | ||
::Etc. | ::Etc. | ||
:Done? | :Done? | ||
− | |||
::Yes | ::Yes | ||
+ | ::No | ||
:Done! | :Done! | ||
Line 134: | Line 126: | ||
::Oh No | ::Oh No | ||
::Burn the Evidence | ::Burn the Evidence | ||
− | :: | + | <!--::More arrows pointing out of the image to suggest more steps--> |
{{comic discussion}} | {{comic discussion}} | ||
[[Category:Analysis]] | [[Category:Analysis]] | ||
− |