175 – Integrating products of secants and tangents

(In what follows, I will write for and for )

Recall that

that

and that

The formulas below make use of these identities repeatedly.

We want a series of methods and reduction formulas that allow us to evaluate any expression of the form

for and integers,

1. Integrating powers of

In lecture we saw that

and derived the following reduction formula for integrating powers of

This formula is valid for any

(The integral of was obtained by what is essentially the method of partial fractions, that we will study in detail when we reach section 7.4 in the book. The reduction formula was obtained using integration by parts.)

Exercise 1Find and

2. Integrating powers of

We also saw that

and derived the following reduction formula:

valid for all

Exercise 2Find and

3. Integrating products of powers of and

Suppose now that we need to evaluate an expression of the form

where both and are at least 1. As in the case of integrals of products of powers of sines and cosines, it is best to divide the problem into two cases.

3.1. If is odd

Suppose first that is odd, say for some integer Then

Since we can write The last integral can then be expressed in the form

This can be easily evaluated using the substitution that transforms it into

To evaluate this expression, expand and multiply the result by This gives us a polynomial in We can integrate the polynomial term by term, and then replace back in place of

Exercise 3Find and

3.2. If is even

Suppose now that is even, say for some integer Then

To evaluate this expression, expand and multiply the result by This gives us a sum of powers of that can be evaluated term by term using the reduction formula from Section 1. Note that this method works even if

Exercise 4Find

Exercise 5Find using this method, and show that your answer actually gives the same result as the answer you found in Exercise 2.

4. Integrating powers of and

Exercise 6(This is long.) Explain how to adapt the methods from the previous sections to find any integral of the form Then repeat the previous exercises but with in place of and instead of

Although I am not writing this as an exercise, it is a good idea to also spend some time thinking about what one would do with integrals of products of powers of and or of and or of all four expressions.

Typeset using LaTeX2WP. Here is a printable version of this post.

Advertisements

Like this:

LikeLoading...

Related

This entry was posted on Friday, October 9th, 2009 at 11:04 am and is filed under 175: Calculus II. You can follow any responses to this entry through the RSS 2.0 feed.
You can leave a response, or trackback from your own site.

I thought about this question a while ago, while teaching a topics course. Since one can easily check that $${}|{\mathbb R}|=|{\mathcal P}({\mathbb N})|$$ by a direct construction that does not involve diagonalization, the question can be restated as: Is there a proof of Cantor's theorem that ${}|X|

First of all, note (as Monroe does in his question) that if $\mathbb P,\mathbb Q$ are ccc, then $\mathbb P\times\mathbb Q$ is $\mathfrak c^+$-cc, as an immediate consequence of the Erdős-Rado theorem $(2^{\aleph_0})^+\to(\aleph_1)^2_2$. (This is to say, if $\mathbb P$ and $\mathbb Q$ do not admit uncountable antichains, then any antichain in their product ha […]

The technique of almost disjoint forcing was introduced in MR0289291 (44 #6482). Jensen, R. B.; Solovay, R. M. Some applications of almost disjoint sets. In Mathematical Logic and Foundations of Set Theory (Proc. Internat. Colloq., Jerusalem, 1968), pp. 84–104, North-Holland, Amsterdam, 1970. Fix an almost disjoint family $X=(x_\alpha:\alpha

At the moment most of those decisions come from me, at least for computer science papers (those with a 68 class as primary). The practice of having proceedings and final versions of papers is not exclusive to computer science, but this is where it is most common. I've found more often than not that the journal version is significantly different from the […]

The answer is no in general. For instance, by what is essentially an argument of Sierpiński, if $(X,\Sigma,\nu)$ is a $\sigma$-finite continuous measure space, then no non-null subset of $X$ admits a $\nu\times\nu$-measurable well-ordering. The proof is almost verbatim the one here. It is consistent (assuming large cardinals) that there is an extension of Le […]

R. Solovay proved that the provably $\mathbf\Delta^1_2$ sets are Lebesgue measurable (and have the property of Baire). A set $A$ is provably $\mathbf\Delta^1_2$ iff there is a real $a$, a $\Sigma^1_2$ formula $\phi(x,y)$ and a $\Pi^1_2$ formula $\psi(x,y)$ such that $$A=\{t\mid \phi(t,a)\}=\{t\mid\psi(t,a)\},$$ and $\mathsf{ZFC}$ proves that $\phi$ and $\psi […]

A notion now considered standard of primitive recursive set function is introduced in MR0281602 (43 #7317). Jensen, Ronald B.; Karp, Carol. Primitive recursive set functions. In 1971 Axiomatic Set Thoory (Proc. Sympos. Pure Math., Vol. XIII, Part I, Univ. California, Los Angeles, Calif., 1967) pp. 143–176 Amer. Math. Soc., Providence, R.I. The concept is use […]

The power of a set is its cardinality. (As opposed to its power set, which is something else.) As you noticed in the comments, Kurepa trees are supposed to have countable levels, although just saying that a tree has size and height $\omega_1$ is not enough to conclude this, so the definition you quoted is incomplete as stated. Usually the convention is that […]

The key problem in the absence of the axiom of replacement is that there may be well-ordered sets $S$ that are too large in the sense that they are longer than any ordinal. In that case, the collection of ordinals isomorphic to an initial segment of $S$ would be the class of all ordinals, which is not a set. For example, with $\omega$ denoting as usual the f […]