Mathematica and Maple disagree on this integral
- To: mathgroup at smc.vnet.net
- Subject: [mg33091] Mathematica and Maple disagree on this integral
- From: Ben Crain <bcrain at bellatlantic.net>
- Date: Fri, 1 Mar 2002 06:52:16 -0500 (EST)
- Sender: owner-wri-mathgroup at wolfram.com
What is the definite integral of Sec(x), from 0 to pi? A textbook answer (Stewart, Calculus) is that it diverges. And that is the answer Maple gives (calling it "undefined"). But Mathematica returns 0. The integral is split into two improper integrals, from 0 to pi/2 and from pi/2 to pi. Each, by itself, diverges. The textbook definition requires both improper integrals to separately converge for the total integral to converge. By that definition, Maple is right. But does that make sense? The second improper integral is just the negative of the first, and they exactly cancel out for the antiderivative ln(abs(sec(t) + tan(t)) at any t close to pi/2. Why don't they exactly offset each other in the limit, as t goes to pi/2, and yield 0? Why shouldn't the integral be so defined, instead of the textbook requirement that the improper integrals must separately converge.
- Follow-Ups:
- Re: Mathematica and Maple disagree on this integral
- From: "Philippe Dumas" <dumasphi@noos.fr>
- Re: Mathematica and Maple disagree on this integral