integral of x^n
- To: mathgroup at smc.vnet.net
- Subject: [mg130575] integral of x^n
- From: Richard Fateman <fateman at cs.berkeley.edu>
- Date: Tue, 23 Apr 2013 00:03:24 -0400 (EDT)
- Delivered-to: firstname.lastname@example.org
- Delivered-to: email@example.com
- Delivered-to: firstname.lastname@example.org
- Delivered-to: email@example.com
- References: <20130420094229.B63996A64@smc.vnet.net> <20130421091626.26FB96AC3@smc.vnet.net> <firstname.lastname@example.org>
On 4/22/2013 12:13 AM, Alex Krasnov wrote:
> In this case, the results are valid for a=1 in the sense of a limit, as
> Limit[u, a -> 1] and limit(u, a, 1) demonstrate. This is not always the
> case. Example:
> In: f = Integrate[x^n, x]
> Out: x^(1 + n)/(1 + n)
> In: Limit[f, n -> -1, Direction -> 1]
> Out: -Infinity
> In: Limit[f, n -> -1, Direction -> -1]
> Out: Infinity
Yes, but an equally valid antiderivative for x^n is
s = (x^(n+1)-1)/(n+1).
Limit[s,n->-1] is Log[x].
This alternative formula was, I think, pointed out more than once
to Wolfram Inc. probably circa version 2.
There are other issues that come up when using antiderivatives +
the fundamental theorem of integral calculus. Some of these become
apparent by reading FTIC carefully.
Prev by Date:
Re: cannot work a "conditional If"
Next by Date:
Re: programmatically save as PDF (SaveRename problem)
Previous by thread:
Re: Re: Mathematica integration Vs Sympy
Next by thread:
Speak errors (was Re: audio)