Definite integrals are the “area under the curve” part of calculus. It relates a bunch to anti-derivatives, which are the indefinite integrals.
The general idea is the definite integral is “area between F and zero when above the x-axis” - “area between F and zero when below the x-axis”.
It’s written like:
A lot of the area functions, once we have definite bounds, begin to look a lot like geometry (which I don’t recall very well).
The properties of a definite integral
Let and be defined on a closed interval that contains the values and and , and let be a constant. The following hold:
Solving w/ geometry
Circles
of note: circle w/ center (a,b) and radius r:
Calculate:
That means we have a circle w/ radius 2 () centered on 0,0 (b/c a=0, b=0).
To get the integral, we want the integral below the funciton, but above the x-axis, so it’s the northeastern quadrant.
So b/c that’s a quarter of a circle, .
—
Calculate:
So the center of the circle is (4,2) with radius 3.
To get the integral, the origin is off to the side, so we don’t just take a quarter of the circle. The 2+ says we erase the parts under 2 from our graph. So it’s basically a half of the circle’s area, plus the rectangle from the 2 down to the x-axis. So because the 2*6 is the height under the curve, times the length of the curve. So the area is .
—
Calculate: .
This means that the origin is (3,1). Radius is 2.
So the origin of 3 mapping to the lower integral of 3 means we’re only concerned with the right half of the circle.
The 1+ means we’re only interested in things above 1, which makes it the top half of the circle.
exercises in 5.2
5-13
5
given y= -2x+4
a)
- it should be the triangle from 0-2 minus 1-2. So 0->2 would be = 4-1 = 3.
b) = 4 c) = 2 (not 6.. right?) d) 1->3 1,2-> 1,-2 = 0 e) 2->4; 2*-4*.5 = -4 f) 0-1, but different formula (3x). 9.
7
y = f(x)
a) 0->2 = 2*4*.5 = 4 b) 2->4 = 2*2*.5 = 2 c) 2-4, 2f(x); 4 d) 0->1, 4x dx; 2 (b/c .5*1*4 = 2) e) 2->3; (2x-4)dx; 1*2*.5 = 1
When we can’t use geometry to find the answers
So when geometry isn’t easy (e.g. ) we can use Reimann Sums. This is “draw equally spaced bounding boxes on the curve, then get the area of the rectangles”. There are three common ways to place the boxes: left hand, right hand and midpoint. It’s a question of where you take the intersection point for a given interval.
If you have as the interval you’re calculating, you could take 0 (left-hand) as the representative value, you could take 1 (right-hand) or you could take 0.5 (midpoint).
To increase fidelity of the estimation provided by Reimann sums, you can add more rectangles. The syntax is weird, so we do summation notation which looks like .
To split the rectangles into equally spaced parts, we need some way of taking in and outputting some portion of it. The formula for grabbing that is:
As an example, if we want to partition [0,4] into 100 intervals, we’d end up with , so .
The left hand rule is Right hand: midpoint:
Rules of summation
Example of how to break down summation
Example of approximating definite integrals using sums
example 5.3.4 from the book
so since the integral is 4 parts and we’re splitting it up into 16 chunks.
so
So let’s break down into those 16 chunks.2
Q: Why didn’t we just plug earlier? I think it’s because we need to figure out how to simplify first.
Reimann Sum definition
If is on a closed interval then is a partition of and denotes a value in the subinterval..
is the Riemann Sum of on .
Partitions of Reimann Sums
So not all partiitons need to be the same length.
The partition of a closed interval is where . The subinterval .
If all of the partitions are equal length, represents the length of the intervals. represents the length of the largest subinterval of the partition.
When the intervals are equal length, their size is . The term of the partition is
Reimann Sum practice
Algorithm
- Find the size of the partitions
- Find out what the interval is for a given partition
- Find the point (e.g. left hand rule vs midpoint, etc) in a given partition .
- Compute the reimann sum (remember, i=1 & n = number-of-partitions)
- plug in the “midpoint” equivalent formula for x
- simplify f via substitution
- simplify everything w/ rules of summation
example 5.3.5
Approximate using the midpoint rule and 10 equally spaced intervals.
I think we’re making
So total size of a partition is:
The interval for a given partition is:
Midpoint:
\begin{align} point &= \frac{x_{i} + x_{i+1}}{2} \\ x_{i} &= \frac{i}{2} - \frac{5}{2} \\ x_{i+1} &= \frac{i+1}{2} - \frac{5}{2} = \frac{i}{2} - 2 \end{align}
I don’t really understand the jump for #3 just above. I know that the delta between i and i+1 = 1/2. Maybe (i+1)/2 breaks down into i/2+1/2 since it’s the same midpoint as before, but just one full interval forward. Then we basically take 1/2 from 5/2 which gives us 4/2 = 2.
Cool, so now we still need to find the midpoint.
Now onto the actual sum!
5.3.6
Approximate
We know from 5.3.1 that:
urg. Honestly a bit lost.
Limits of Reimann Sums
Approximating curves using trapezoids
Each side of the trapezoids are used twice, except the first and last. So we can simplify our manual summations by this formula:
So, given that
^^ For that to really work, we should build up a table of values so we know how to sum them.
Simpson’s rule
The idea is that using rectangles is a constant function, using trapezoids is a linear function and using simpson’s rule is using quadratic functions.
I don’t quite understand how they got this formula, despite them saying “it’s not hard to show that..”
Because we need 3 points, that means it uses 2 partitions to do it, resulting in parabolas.
When we get the area under the curve, we use the formula:
Example 5.5.5
Approximate into 4 subintervals.
Make a table of values:
i | ||
---|---|---|
1 | 0 | 1 |
2 | 0.25 | .9394 |
3 | 0.5 | .7788 |
4 | 0.75 | .570 |
5 | 1.0 | .3678 |
5.5.6
approximate into 10 equally spaced intervals using simpson’s rule
formula for
Table of values: (can’t seem to calculate sin(x^3) w/ formulas: https://emacs.stackexchange.com/questions/71332/sin-function-in-org-calc-being-weird)
i | ||
---|---|---|
0 | -0.785 | -0.46509031 |
1 | -0.549 | -0.16471509 |
2 | -0.313 | -0.030659492 |
3 | -0.077 | -4.5653298e-4 |
4 | 0.159 | 4.0196682e-3 |
5 | 0.395 | 0.061590868 |
6 | 0.631 | 0.24860482 |
7 | 0.867 | 0.60655029 |
8 | 1.103 | 0.97392189 |
9 | 1.339 | 0.67493118 |
10 | 1.575 | -0.69281953 |
Error bounds
Okay, so our approximations may be bad. To figure out how bad, we can use error bounds for the trepezoidal rule or simpson’s rule:
- Let be the error in approximating using the trapezoid rule w/ subintervals. If has a continuous 2nd derivative on [a,b] and M is any upperbound of on [a,b], then
- Let be the error in approximating using Simpson’s rule w/ subintervals. If has a continuous 4th derivative on [a,b] and M is any upperbound of on [a,b] then