How to find the derivative of a definite integral that has unusual lower and upper bounds?
I'm not sure how to deal with upper and lower bounds in integrals when using the first part of the fundamental theorem of calculus to work with them.
The question I'm looking at asks me to find the derivative of the function, where the function is a definite integral. The question is explicitly telling me to use the fact that $frac{d}{dx} int f(x)dx = f(x)$, i.e. the first part of the fundamental theorem of calculus, to answer the question.
The function is:
$$int_{sqrt{x}}^{pi/4} theta cdot tantheta cdot dtheta = g(x)$$
In words: if a function corresponds to an integral where the upper bound on the integral is $pi/4$, the lower bound is $sqrt{x}$, and the function being integrated is $theta cdot tantheta$ with respect to $theta$, then what is the derivative of the function?
I've tried setting $u = pi/4$ and applying the chain rule, that's worked in the past but it doesn't give me the right answer here. I'm guessing I also have to incorporate the lower bound, that $sqrt{x}$, in my solution somehow, but I have no idea how.
Any help would be greatly appreciated.
calculus integration definite-integrals
add a comment |
I'm not sure how to deal with upper and lower bounds in integrals when using the first part of the fundamental theorem of calculus to work with them.
The question I'm looking at asks me to find the derivative of the function, where the function is a definite integral. The question is explicitly telling me to use the fact that $frac{d}{dx} int f(x)dx = f(x)$, i.e. the first part of the fundamental theorem of calculus, to answer the question.
The function is:
$$int_{sqrt{x}}^{pi/4} theta cdot tantheta cdot dtheta = g(x)$$
In words: if a function corresponds to an integral where the upper bound on the integral is $pi/4$, the lower bound is $sqrt{x}$, and the function being integrated is $theta cdot tantheta$ with respect to $theta$, then what is the derivative of the function?
I've tried setting $u = pi/4$ and applying the chain rule, that's worked in the past but it doesn't give me the right answer here. I'm guessing I also have to incorporate the lower bound, that $sqrt{x}$, in my solution somehow, but I have no idea how.
Any help would be greatly appreciated.
calculus integration definite-integrals
3
Hint: chain rule.
– GEdgar
Nov 24 at 22:34
As a suggested reading, check out Leibniz Rule for differentiation of integrals.
– Shubham Johri
Nov 24 at 22:44
Hint: $int_{-infty}^x f(x) dx = f(x)$, so $int_a^bf(x) dx = int_{-infty}^b f(x) dx - int_{-infty}^a f(x) dx$
– eSurfsnake
Nov 25 at 7:19
add a comment |
I'm not sure how to deal with upper and lower bounds in integrals when using the first part of the fundamental theorem of calculus to work with them.
The question I'm looking at asks me to find the derivative of the function, where the function is a definite integral. The question is explicitly telling me to use the fact that $frac{d}{dx} int f(x)dx = f(x)$, i.e. the first part of the fundamental theorem of calculus, to answer the question.
The function is:
$$int_{sqrt{x}}^{pi/4} theta cdot tantheta cdot dtheta = g(x)$$
In words: if a function corresponds to an integral where the upper bound on the integral is $pi/4$, the lower bound is $sqrt{x}$, and the function being integrated is $theta cdot tantheta$ with respect to $theta$, then what is the derivative of the function?
I've tried setting $u = pi/4$ and applying the chain rule, that's worked in the past but it doesn't give me the right answer here. I'm guessing I also have to incorporate the lower bound, that $sqrt{x}$, in my solution somehow, but I have no idea how.
Any help would be greatly appreciated.
calculus integration definite-integrals
I'm not sure how to deal with upper and lower bounds in integrals when using the first part of the fundamental theorem of calculus to work with them.
The question I'm looking at asks me to find the derivative of the function, where the function is a definite integral. The question is explicitly telling me to use the fact that $frac{d}{dx} int f(x)dx = f(x)$, i.e. the first part of the fundamental theorem of calculus, to answer the question.
The function is:
$$int_{sqrt{x}}^{pi/4} theta cdot tantheta cdot dtheta = g(x)$$
In words: if a function corresponds to an integral where the upper bound on the integral is $pi/4$, the lower bound is $sqrt{x}$, and the function being integrated is $theta cdot tantheta$ with respect to $theta$, then what is the derivative of the function?
I've tried setting $u = pi/4$ and applying the chain rule, that's worked in the past but it doesn't give me the right answer here. I'm guessing I also have to incorporate the lower bound, that $sqrt{x}$, in my solution somehow, but I have no idea how.
Any help would be greatly appreciated.
calculus integration definite-integrals
calculus integration definite-integrals
edited Nov 24 at 22:42
Eevee Trainer
3,370225
3,370225
asked Nov 24 at 22:30
James Ronald
977
977
3
Hint: chain rule.
– GEdgar
Nov 24 at 22:34
As a suggested reading, check out Leibniz Rule for differentiation of integrals.
– Shubham Johri
Nov 24 at 22:44
Hint: $int_{-infty}^x f(x) dx = f(x)$, so $int_a^bf(x) dx = int_{-infty}^b f(x) dx - int_{-infty}^a f(x) dx$
– eSurfsnake
Nov 25 at 7:19
add a comment |
3
Hint: chain rule.
– GEdgar
Nov 24 at 22:34
As a suggested reading, check out Leibniz Rule for differentiation of integrals.
– Shubham Johri
Nov 24 at 22:44
Hint: $int_{-infty}^x f(x) dx = f(x)$, so $int_a^bf(x) dx = int_{-infty}^b f(x) dx - int_{-infty}^a f(x) dx$
– eSurfsnake
Nov 25 at 7:19
3
3
Hint: chain rule.
– GEdgar
Nov 24 at 22:34
Hint: chain rule.
– GEdgar
Nov 24 at 22:34
As a suggested reading, check out Leibniz Rule for differentiation of integrals.
– Shubham Johri
Nov 24 at 22:44
As a suggested reading, check out Leibniz Rule for differentiation of integrals.
– Shubham Johri
Nov 24 at 22:44
Hint: $int_{-infty}^x f(x) dx = f(x)$, so $int_a^bf(x) dx = int_{-infty}^b f(x) dx - int_{-infty}^a f(x) dx$
– eSurfsnake
Nov 25 at 7:19
Hint: $int_{-infty}^x f(x) dx = f(x)$, so $int_a^bf(x) dx = int_{-infty}^b f(x) dx - int_{-infty}^a f(x) dx$
– eSurfsnake
Nov 25 at 7:19
add a comment |
2 Answers
2
active
oldest
votes
So,$$g(x)=int_{sqrt x}^{fracpi4}thetatantheta,mathrm dtheta=-int_{fracpi4}^{sqrt x}thetatantheta,mathrm dtheta.$$Can you now apply the Fundamental Theorem of Calculus, together with the chain rule?
Yes I can, thank you so much! That was a lot simpler than I thought. So does the lower bound not matter at all when applying the first part of the FTC?
– James Ronald
Nov 24 at 22:42
No, the lower bound does not matter.
– José Carlos Santos
Nov 24 at 22:45
add a comment |
After years of tutoring Calculus I, it baffles me that professors somehow expect students to figure out how to extend part I of the Fundamental Theorem of Calculus to cases where the upper limit is not $x$ and the lower limit is not a constant.
So, I will provide you with a quick, intuitive (and not rigorous) derivation on how you should approach this.
Suppose the lower limit is $L(x)$ and the upper limit is $U(x)$ of the integral. Define
$$g(x) = int_{L(x)}^{U(x)}f(t)text{ d}ttext{.}$$
Suppose $F$ is an antiderivative of $f$. By part II of the Fundamental Theorem of Calculus, you know that
$$g(x) = int_{L(x)}^{U(x)}f(t)text{ d}t = F(U(x)) - F(L(x))text{.}$$
Then, the derivative of $g$ is given by, assuming differentiability of $U$ and $L$,
$$dfrac{text{d}}{text{d}x}[g(x)] = F^{prime}(U(x))U^{prime}(x)-F^{prime}(L(x))L^{prime}(x)$$
after making use of the chain rule for derivatives. But, $F$ is an antiderivative of $f$, so $F^{prime} = f$, hence
$$dfrac{text{d}}{text{d}x}[g(x)] = f(U(x))U^{prime}(x)-f(L(x))L^{prime}(x)text{.}$$
In other words, the main result is
$$boxed{ dfrac{text{d}}{text{d}x}int_{L(x)}^{U(x)}f(t)text{ d}t = f(U(x))U^{prime}(x)-f(L(x))L^{prime}(x)text{.}}$$
Applying to this problem, we have $f(theta) = theta tan(theta)$, $U(x) = dfrac{pi}{4}$, and $L(x) = sqrt{x}$. The derivatives are $U^{prime}(x) = 0$ and $L^{prime}(x) = dfrac{1}{2sqrt{x}}$. Hence, the derivative of $g$ is
$$g^{prime}(x) = f(U(x))U^{prime}(x)-f(L(x))L^{prime}(x) = fleft(dfrac{pi}{4}right)(0) - fleft(sqrt{x}right) cdot dfrac{1}{2sqrt{x}}$$
which simplifies to
$$g^{prime}(x) = - fleft(sqrt{x}right) cdot dfrac{1}{2sqrt{x}} = -sqrt{x}tan(sqrt{x}) cdot dfrac{1}{2sqrt{x}} = -dfrac{1}{2}tan(sqrt{x})text{.}$$
Wow, that really is a great intuition, thank you so much! You said it's not rigorous, but it seems be a completely valid proof, and as long as it's valid the simpler the better in my opinion haha. I wish I'd seen this earlier. Thanks again!
– James Ronald
Nov 24 at 23:11
add a comment |
Your Answer
StackExchange.ifUsing("editor", function () {
return StackExchange.using("mathjaxEditing", function () {
StackExchange.MarkdownEditor.creationCallbacks.add(function (editor, postfix) {
StackExchange.mathjaxEditing.prepareWmdForMathJax(editor, postfix, [["$", "$"], ["\\(","\\)"]]);
});
});
}, "mathjax-editing");
StackExchange.ready(function() {
var channelOptions = {
tags: "".split(" "),
id: "69"
};
initTagRenderer("".split(" "), "".split(" "), channelOptions);
StackExchange.using("externalEditor", function() {
// Have to fire editor after snippets, if snippets enabled
if (StackExchange.settings.snippets.snippetsEnabled) {
StackExchange.using("snippets", function() {
createEditor();
});
}
else {
createEditor();
}
});
function createEditor() {
StackExchange.prepareEditor({
heartbeatType: 'answer',
autoActivateHeartbeat: false,
convertImagesToLinks: true,
noModals: true,
showLowRepImageUploadWarning: true,
reputationToPostImages: 10,
bindNavPrevention: true,
postfix: "",
imageUploader: {
brandingHtml: "Powered by u003ca class="icon-imgur-white" href="https://imgur.com/"u003eu003c/au003e",
contentPolicyHtml: "User contributions licensed under u003ca href="https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-sa/3.0/"u003ecc by-sa 3.0 with attribution requiredu003c/au003e u003ca href="https://stackoverflow.com/legal/content-policy"u003e(content policy)u003c/au003e",
allowUrls: true
},
noCode: true, onDemand: true,
discardSelector: ".discard-answer"
,immediatelyShowMarkdownHelp:true
});
}
});
Sign up or log in
StackExchange.ready(function () {
StackExchange.helpers.onClickDraftSave('#login-link');
});
Sign up using Google
Sign up using Facebook
Sign up using Email and Password
Post as a guest
Required, but never shown
StackExchange.ready(
function () {
StackExchange.openid.initPostLogin('.new-post-login', 'https%3a%2f%2fmath.stackexchange.com%2fquestions%2f3012182%2fhow-to-find-the-derivative-of-a-definite-integral-that-has-unusual-lower-and-upp%23new-answer', 'question_page');
}
);
Post as a guest
Required, but never shown
2 Answers
2
active
oldest
votes
2 Answers
2
active
oldest
votes
active
oldest
votes
active
oldest
votes
So,$$g(x)=int_{sqrt x}^{fracpi4}thetatantheta,mathrm dtheta=-int_{fracpi4}^{sqrt x}thetatantheta,mathrm dtheta.$$Can you now apply the Fundamental Theorem of Calculus, together with the chain rule?
Yes I can, thank you so much! That was a lot simpler than I thought. So does the lower bound not matter at all when applying the first part of the FTC?
– James Ronald
Nov 24 at 22:42
No, the lower bound does not matter.
– José Carlos Santos
Nov 24 at 22:45
add a comment |
So,$$g(x)=int_{sqrt x}^{fracpi4}thetatantheta,mathrm dtheta=-int_{fracpi4}^{sqrt x}thetatantheta,mathrm dtheta.$$Can you now apply the Fundamental Theorem of Calculus, together with the chain rule?
Yes I can, thank you so much! That was a lot simpler than I thought. So does the lower bound not matter at all when applying the first part of the FTC?
– James Ronald
Nov 24 at 22:42
No, the lower bound does not matter.
– José Carlos Santos
Nov 24 at 22:45
add a comment |
So,$$g(x)=int_{sqrt x}^{fracpi4}thetatantheta,mathrm dtheta=-int_{fracpi4}^{sqrt x}thetatantheta,mathrm dtheta.$$Can you now apply the Fundamental Theorem of Calculus, together with the chain rule?
So,$$g(x)=int_{sqrt x}^{fracpi4}thetatantheta,mathrm dtheta=-int_{fracpi4}^{sqrt x}thetatantheta,mathrm dtheta.$$Can you now apply the Fundamental Theorem of Calculus, together with the chain rule?
answered Nov 24 at 22:34
José Carlos Santos
148k22117218
148k22117218
Yes I can, thank you so much! That was a lot simpler than I thought. So does the lower bound not matter at all when applying the first part of the FTC?
– James Ronald
Nov 24 at 22:42
No, the lower bound does not matter.
– José Carlos Santos
Nov 24 at 22:45
add a comment |
Yes I can, thank you so much! That was a lot simpler than I thought. So does the lower bound not matter at all when applying the first part of the FTC?
– James Ronald
Nov 24 at 22:42
No, the lower bound does not matter.
– José Carlos Santos
Nov 24 at 22:45
Yes I can, thank you so much! That was a lot simpler than I thought. So does the lower bound not matter at all when applying the first part of the FTC?
– James Ronald
Nov 24 at 22:42
Yes I can, thank you so much! That was a lot simpler than I thought. So does the lower bound not matter at all when applying the first part of the FTC?
– James Ronald
Nov 24 at 22:42
No, the lower bound does not matter.
– José Carlos Santos
Nov 24 at 22:45
No, the lower bound does not matter.
– José Carlos Santos
Nov 24 at 22:45
add a comment |
After years of tutoring Calculus I, it baffles me that professors somehow expect students to figure out how to extend part I of the Fundamental Theorem of Calculus to cases where the upper limit is not $x$ and the lower limit is not a constant.
So, I will provide you with a quick, intuitive (and not rigorous) derivation on how you should approach this.
Suppose the lower limit is $L(x)$ and the upper limit is $U(x)$ of the integral. Define
$$g(x) = int_{L(x)}^{U(x)}f(t)text{ d}ttext{.}$$
Suppose $F$ is an antiderivative of $f$. By part II of the Fundamental Theorem of Calculus, you know that
$$g(x) = int_{L(x)}^{U(x)}f(t)text{ d}t = F(U(x)) - F(L(x))text{.}$$
Then, the derivative of $g$ is given by, assuming differentiability of $U$ and $L$,
$$dfrac{text{d}}{text{d}x}[g(x)] = F^{prime}(U(x))U^{prime}(x)-F^{prime}(L(x))L^{prime}(x)$$
after making use of the chain rule for derivatives. But, $F$ is an antiderivative of $f$, so $F^{prime} = f$, hence
$$dfrac{text{d}}{text{d}x}[g(x)] = f(U(x))U^{prime}(x)-f(L(x))L^{prime}(x)text{.}$$
In other words, the main result is
$$boxed{ dfrac{text{d}}{text{d}x}int_{L(x)}^{U(x)}f(t)text{ d}t = f(U(x))U^{prime}(x)-f(L(x))L^{prime}(x)text{.}}$$
Applying to this problem, we have $f(theta) = theta tan(theta)$, $U(x) = dfrac{pi}{4}$, and $L(x) = sqrt{x}$. The derivatives are $U^{prime}(x) = 0$ and $L^{prime}(x) = dfrac{1}{2sqrt{x}}$. Hence, the derivative of $g$ is
$$g^{prime}(x) = f(U(x))U^{prime}(x)-f(L(x))L^{prime}(x) = fleft(dfrac{pi}{4}right)(0) - fleft(sqrt{x}right) cdot dfrac{1}{2sqrt{x}}$$
which simplifies to
$$g^{prime}(x) = - fleft(sqrt{x}right) cdot dfrac{1}{2sqrt{x}} = -sqrt{x}tan(sqrt{x}) cdot dfrac{1}{2sqrt{x}} = -dfrac{1}{2}tan(sqrt{x})text{.}$$
Wow, that really is a great intuition, thank you so much! You said it's not rigorous, but it seems be a completely valid proof, and as long as it's valid the simpler the better in my opinion haha. I wish I'd seen this earlier. Thanks again!
– James Ronald
Nov 24 at 23:11
add a comment |
After years of tutoring Calculus I, it baffles me that professors somehow expect students to figure out how to extend part I of the Fundamental Theorem of Calculus to cases where the upper limit is not $x$ and the lower limit is not a constant.
So, I will provide you with a quick, intuitive (and not rigorous) derivation on how you should approach this.
Suppose the lower limit is $L(x)$ and the upper limit is $U(x)$ of the integral. Define
$$g(x) = int_{L(x)}^{U(x)}f(t)text{ d}ttext{.}$$
Suppose $F$ is an antiderivative of $f$. By part II of the Fundamental Theorem of Calculus, you know that
$$g(x) = int_{L(x)}^{U(x)}f(t)text{ d}t = F(U(x)) - F(L(x))text{.}$$
Then, the derivative of $g$ is given by, assuming differentiability of $U$ and $L$,
$$dfrac{text{d}}{text{d}x}[g(x)] = F^{prime}(U(x))U^{prime}(x)-F^{prime}(L(x))L^{prime}(x)$$
after making use of the chain rule for derivatives. But, $F$ is an antiderivative of $f$, so $F^{prime} = f$, hence
$$dfrac{text{d}}{text{d}x}[g(x)] = f(U(x))U^{prime}(x)-f(L(x))L^{prime}(x)text{.}$$
In other words, the main result is
$$boxed{ dfrac{text{d}}{text{d}x}int_{L(x)}^{U(x)}f(t)text{ d}t = f(U(x))U^{prime}(x)-f(L(x))L^{prime}(x)text{.}}$$
Applying to this problem, we have $f(theta) = theta tan(theta)$, $U(x) = dfrac{pi}{4}$, and $L(x) = sqrt{x}$. The derivatives are $U^{prime}(x) = 0$ and $L^{prime}(x) = dfrac{1}{2sqrt{x}}$. Hence, the derivative of $g$ is
$$g^{prime}(x) = f(U(x))U^{prime}(x)-f(L(x))L^{prime}(x) = fleft(dfrac{pi}{4}right)(0) - fleft(sqrt{x}right) cdot dfrac{1}{2sqrt{x}}$$
which simplifies to
$$g^{prime}(x) = - fleft(sqrt{x}right) cdot dfrac{1}{2sqrt{x}} = -sqrt{x}tan(sqrt{x}) cdot dfrac{1}{2sqrt{x}} = -dfrac{1}{2}tan(sqrt{x})text{.}$$
Wow, that really is a great intuition, thank you so much! You said it's not rigorous, but it seems be a completely valid proof, and as long as it's valid the simpler the better in my opinion haha. I wish I'd seen this earlier. Thanks again!
– James Ronald
Nov 24 at 23:11
add a comment |
After years of tutoring Calculus I, it baffles me that professors somehow expect students to figure out how to extend part I of the Fundamental Theorem of Calculus to cases where the upper limit is not $x$ and the lower limit is not a constant.
So, I will provide you with a quick, intuitive (and not rigorous) derivation on how you should approach this.
Suppose the lower limit is $L(x)$ and the upper limit is $U(x)$ of the integral. Define
$$g(x) = int_{L(x)}^{U(x)}f(t)text{ d}ttext{.}$$
Suppose $F$ is an antiderivative of $f$. By part II of the Fundamental Theorem of Calculus, you know that
$$g(x) = int_{L(x)}^{U(x)}f(t)text{ d}t = F(U(x)) - F(L(x))text{.}$$
Then, the derivative of $g$ is given by, assuming differentiability of $U$ and $L$,
$$dfrac{text{d}}{text{d}x}[g(x)] = F^{prime}(U(x))U^{prime}(x)-F^{prime}(L(x))L^{prime}(x)$$
after making use of the chain rule for derivatives. But, $F$ is an antiderivative of $f$, so $F^{prime} = f$, hence
$$dfrac{text{d}}{text{d}x}[g(x)] = f(U(x))U^{prime}(x)-f(L(x))L^{prime}(x)text{.}$$
In other words, the main result is
$$boxed{ dfrac{text{d}}{text{d}x}int_{L(x)}^{U(x)}f(t)text{ d}t = f(U(x))U^{prime}(x)-f(L(x))L^{prime}(x)text{.}}$$
Applying to this problem, we have $f(theta) = theta tan(theta)$, $U(x) = dfrac{pi}{4}$, and $L(x) = sqrt{x}$. The derivatives are $U^{prime}(x) = 0$ and $L^{prime}(x) = dfrac{1}{2sqrt{x}}$. Hence, the derivative of $g$ is
$$g^{prime}(x) = f(U(x))U^{prime}(x)-f(L(x))L^{prime}(x) = fleft(dfrac{pi}{4}right)(0) - fleft(sqrt{x}right) cdot dfrac{1}{2sqrt{x}}$$
which simplifies to
$$g^{prime}(x) = - fleft(sqrt{x}right) cdot dfrac{1}{2sqrt{x}} = -sqrt{x}tan(sqrt{x}) cdot dfrac{1}{2sqrt{x}} = -dfrac{1}{2}tan(sqrt{x})text{.}$$
After years of tutoring Calculus I, it baffles me that professors somehow expect students to figure out how to extend part I of the Fundamental Theorem of Calculus to cases where the upper limit is not $x$ and the lower limit is not a constant.
So, I will provide you with a quick, intuitive (and not rigorous) derivation on how you should approach this.
Suppose the lower limit is $L(x)$ and the upper limit is $U(x)$ of the integral. Define
$$g(x) = int_{L(x)}^{U(x)}f(t)text{ d}ttext{.}$$
Suppose $F$ is an antiderivative of $f$. By part II of the Fundamental Theorem of Calculus, you know that
$$g(x) = int_{L(x)}^{U(x)}f(t)text{ d}t = F(U(x)) - F(L(x))text{.}$$
Then, the derivative of $g$ is given by, assuming differentiability of $U$ and $L$,
$$dfrac{text{d}}{text{d}x}[g(x)] = F^{prime}(U(x))U^{prime}(x)-F^{prime}(L(x))L^{prime}(x)$$
after making use of the chain rule for derivatives. But, $F$ is an antiderivative of $f$, so $F^{prime} = f$, hence
$$dfrac{text{d}}{text{d}x}[g(x)] = f(U(x))U^{prime}(x)-f(L(x))L^{prime}(x)text{.}$$
In other words, the main result is
$$boxed{ dfrac{text{d}}{text{d}x}int_{L(x)}^{U(x)}f(t)text{ d}t = f(U(x))U^{prime}(x)-f(L(x))L^{prime}(x)text{.}}$$
Applying to this problem, we have $f(theta) = theta tan(theta)$, $U(x) = dfrac{pi}{4}$, and $L(x) = sqrt{x}$. The derivatives are $U^{prime}(x) = 0$ and $L^{prime}(x) = dfrac{1}{2sqrt{x}}$. Hence, the derivative of $g$ is
$$g^{prime}(x) = f(U(x))U^{prime}(x)-f(L(x))L^{prime}(x) = fleft(dfrac{pi}{4}right)(0) - fleft(sqrt{x}right) cdot dfrac{1}{2sqrt{x}}$$
which simplifies to
$$g^{prime}(x) = - fleft(sqrt{x}right) cdot dfrac{1}{2sqrt{x}} = -sqrt{x}tan(sqrt{x}) cdot dfrac{1}{2sqrt{x}} = -dfrac{1}{2}tan(sqrt{x})text{.}$$
answered Nov 24 at 22:47
Clarinetist
10.8k42778
10.8k42778
Wow, that really is a great intuition, thank you so much! You said it's not rigorous, but it seems be a completely valid proof, and as long as it's valid the simpler the better in my opinion haha. I wish I'd seen this earlier. Thanks again!
– James Ronald
Nov 24 at 23:11
add a comment |
Wow, that really is a great intuition, thank you so much! You said it's not rigorous, but it seems be a completely valid proof, and as long as it's valid the simpler the better in my opinion haha. I wish I'd seen this earlier. Thanks again!
– James Ronald
Nov 24 at 23:11
Wow, that really is a great intuition, thank you so much! You said it's not rigorous, but it seems be a completely valid proof, and as long as it's valid the simpler the better in my opinion haha. I wish I'd seen this earlier. Thanks again!
– James Ronald
Nov 24 at 23:11
Wow, that really is a great intuition, thank you so much! You said it's not rigorous, but it seems be a completely valid proof, and as long as it's valid the simpler the better in my opinion haha. I wish I'd seen this earlier. Thanks again!
– James Ronald
Nov 24 at 23:11
add a comment |
Thanks for contributing an answer to Mathematics Stack Exchange!
- Please be sure to answer the question. Provide details and share your research!
But avoid …
- Asking for help, clarification, or responding to other answers.
- Making statements based on opinion; back them up with references or personal experience.
Use MathJax to format equations. MathJax reference.
To learn more, see our tips on writing great answers.
Some of your past answers have not been well-received, and you're in danger of being blocked from answering.
Please pay close attention to the following guidance:
- Please be sure to answer the question. Provide details and share your research!
But avoid …
- Asking for help, clarification, or responding to other answers.
- Making statements based on opinion; back them up with references or personal experience.
To learn more, see our tips on writing great answers.
Sign up or log in
StackExchange.ready(function () {
StackExchange.helpers.onClickDraftSave('#login-link');
});
Sign up using Google
Sign up using Facebook
Sign up using Email and Password
Post as a guest
Required, but never shown
StackExchange.ready(
function () {
StackExchange.openid.initPostLogin('.new-post-login', 'https%3a%2f%2fmath.stackexchange.com%2fquestions%2f3012182%2fhow-to-find-the-derivative-of-a-definite-integral-that-has-unusual-lower-and-upp%23new-answer', 'question_page');
}
);
Post as a guest
Required, but never shown
Sign up or log in
StackExchange.ready(function () {
StackExchange.helpers.onClickDraftSave('#login-link');
});
Sign up using Google
Sign up using Facebook
Sign up using Email and Password
Post as a guest
Required, but never shown
Sign up or log in
StackExchange.ready(function () {
StackExchange.helpers.onClickDraftSave('#login-link');
});
Sign up using Google
Sign up using Facebook
Sign up using Email and Password
Post as a guest
Required, but never shown
Sign up or log in
StackExchange.ready(function () {
StackExchange.helpers.onClickDraftSave('#login-link');
});
Sign up using Google
Sign up using Facebook
Sign up using Email and Password
Sign up using Google
Sign up using Facebook
Sign up using Email and Password
Post as a guest
Required, but never shown
Required, but never shown
Required, but never shown
Required, but never shown
Required, but never shown
Required, but never shown
Required, but never shown
Required, but never shown
Required, but never shown
3
Hint: chain rule.
– GEdgar
Nov 24 at 22:34
As a suggested reading, check out Leibniz Rule for differentiation of integrals.
– Shubham Johri
Nov 24 at 22:44
Hint: $int_{-infty}^x f(x) dx = f(x)$, so $int_a^bf(x) dx = int_{-infty}^b f(x) dx - int_{-infty}^a f(x) dx$
– eSurfsnake
Nov 25 at 7:19