Is a definite integral just a summation?












4












$begingroup$


I am learning about definite integrals and found the formula for finding an average of a function over a given interval:



$$frac{1}{b-a} int_{a}^{b} fleft(xright) dx$$



If we look at the average function for a set of numbers:
$$frac{1}{n} sum_{i=1}^{n} x_i$$



It would seem as if the integral is essentially a summation of all values from $a$ to $b$. Is it correct to think of it this way?






calculus definite-integrals means







share|cite|improve this question









$endgroup$








  • 2




    $begingroup$
    Yeah; that's exactly how one would think of it. This becomes more clear if you look at the formal definition of an integral.
    $endgroup$
    – Hyperion
    2 hours ago






  • 1




    $begingroup$
    Notice that the functional values have been multiplied by $dx$, so $f(x)dx$ is the area of the elemental strip having thickness $dx$ and height $f(x)$. The integral can be treated as a summation of these differential areas
    $endgroup$
    – Shubham Johri
    2 hours ago
















4












$begingroup$


I am learning about definite integrals and found the formula for finding an average of a function over a given interval:



$$frac{1}{b-a} int_{a}^{b} fleft(xright) dx$$



If we look at the average function for a set of numbers:
$$frac{1}{n} sum_{i=1}^{n} x_i$$



It would seem as if the integral is essentially a summation of all values from $a$ to $b$. Is it correct to think of it this way?






calculus definite-integrals means







share|cite|improve this question









$endgroup$








  • 2




    $begingroup$
    Yeah; that's exactly how one would think of it. This becomes more clear if you look at the formal definition of an integral.
    $endgroup$
    – Hyperion
    2 hours ago






  • 1




    $begingroup$
    Notice that the functional values have been multiplied by $dx$, so $f(x)dx$ is the area of the elemental strip having thickness $dx$ and height $f(x)$. The integral can be treated as a summation of these differential areas
    $endgroup$
    – Shubham Johri
    2 hours ago














4












4








4





$begingroup$


I am learning about definite integrals and found the formula for finding an average of a function over a given interval:



$$frac{1}{b-a} int_{a}^{b} fleft(xright) dx$$



If we look at the average function for a set of numbers:
$$frac{1}{n} sum_{i=1}^{n} x_i$$



It would seem as if the integral is essentially a summation of all values from $a$ to $b$. Is it correct to think of it this way?






calculus definite-integrals means







share|cite|improve this question









$endgroup$




I am learning about definite integrals and found the formula for finding an average of a function over a given interval:



$$frac{1}{b-a} int_{a}^{b} fleft(xright) dx$$



If we look at the average function for a set of numbers:
$$frac{1}{n} sum_{i=1}^{n} x_i$$



It would seem as if the integral is essentially a summation of all values from $a$ to $b$. Is it correct to think of it this way?






calculus definite-integrals means




calculus definite-integrals means






share|cite|improve this question













share|cite|improve this question











share|cite|improve this question




share|cite|improve this question










asked 2 hours ago









MCMasteryMCMastery

1648




1648








  • 2




    $begingroup$
    Yeah; that's exactly how one would think of it. This becomes more clear if you look at the formal definition of an integral.
    $endgroup$
    – Hyperion
    2 hours ago






  • 1




    $begingroup$
    Notice that the functional values have been multiplied by $dx$, so $f(x)dx$ is the area of the elemental strip having thickness $dx$ and height $f(x)$. The integral can be treated as a summation of these differential areas
    $endgroup$
    – Shubham Johri
    2 hours ago














  • 2




    $begingroup$
    Yeah; that's exactly how one would think of it. This becomes more clear if you look at the formal definition of an integral.
    $endgroup$
    – Hyperion
    2 hours ago






  • 1




    $begingroup$
    Notice that the functional values have been multiplied by $dx$, so $f(x)dx$ is the area of the elemental strip having thickness $dx$ and height $f(x)$. The integral can be treated as a summation of these differential areas
    $endgroup$
    – Shubham Johri
    2 hours ago








2




2




$begingroup$
Yeah; that's exactly how one would think of it. This becomes more clear if you look at the formal definition of an integral.
$endgroup$
– Hyperion
2 hours ago




$begingroup$
Yeah; that's exactly how one would think of it. This becomes more clear if you look at the formal definition of an integral.
$endgroup$
– Hyperion
2 hours ago




1




1




$begingroup$
Notice that the functional values have been multiplied by $dx$, so $f(x)dx$ is the area of the elemental strip having thickness $dx$ and height $f(x)$. The integral can be treated as a summation of these differential areas
$endgroup$
– Shubham Johri
2 hours ago




$begingroup$
Notice that the functional values have been multiplied by $dx$, so $f(x)dx$ is the area of the elemental strip having thickness $dx$ and height $f(x)$. The integral can be treated as a summation of these differential areas
$endgroup$
– Shubham Johri
2 hours ago










2 Answers
2






active

oldest

votes


















3












$begingroup$

It's certainly helpful to think of integrals this way, though not strictly correct. An integral takes all the little slivers of area beneath a curve and sums them up into a bigger area - though there's, of course, a lot of technicality needed to think about it this way.




There is an idea being obscured by your idea of an integral as a sum, however. In truth, a sum is a kind of integral and not vice versa - this is somewhat counterintuitive given that sums are much more familiar objects than integrals, but there's an elegant theory known as Lebesgue integration which basically makes the integral a tool which eats two pieces of information:




  • We start with some indexing set and some way to "weigh" pieces of that set.


  • We have some function on that set.



Then, the Lebesgue integral spits out the weighted "sum" of that function.



An integral in the most common sense arises when you say, "I have a function on the real numbers, and I want an interval to have weight equal to its length." A finite sum arises when you say "I have a function taking values $x_1,ldots,x_n$ on the index set ${1,ldots,n}$. Each index gets weight $1$" - and, of course, you can change those weights to get a weighted sum or you can extend the indexing set to every natural number to get an infinite sum. But, the basic thing to note is that there's a more general idea of integral that places summation as part of the theory of integration.






share|cite|improve this answer









$endgroup$





















    1












    $begingroup$

    Yes, and no. In so much as the definite integral is a "sum" it is a limit of a Riemann sum as the "mesh" goes to zero. The "mesh" is the largest part of a partition. That is, your domain is broken up into parts over which you take the average value of your function, and multiply by the width of that part.



    It's typically helpful to think about definite integrals as sums over "infinitesimal" displacements, but strictly speaking, that is incorrect.






    share|cite|improve this answer









    $endgroup$













      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
      });


      }
      });














      draft saved

      draft discarded


















      StackExchange.ready(
      function () {
      StackExchange.openid.initPostLogin('.new-post-login', 'https%3a%2f%2fmath.stackexchange.com%2fquestions%2f3091706%2fis-a-definite-integral-just-a-summation%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









      3












      $begingroup$

      It's certainly helpful to think of integrals this way, though not strictly correct. An integral takes all the little slivers of area beneath a curve and sums them up into a bigger area - though there's, of course, a lot of technicality needed to think about it this way.




      There is an idea being obscured by your idea of an integral as a sum, however. In truth, a sum is a kind of integral and not vice versa - this is somewhat counterintuitive given that sums are much more familiar objects than integrals, but there's an elegant theory known as Lebesgue integration which basically makes the integral a tool which eats two pieces of information:




      • We start with some indexing set and some way to "weigh" pieces of that set.


      • We have some function on that set.



      Then, the Lebesgue integral spits out the weighted "sum" of that function.



      An integral in the most common sense arises when you say, "I have a function on the real numbers, and I want an interval to have weight equal to its length." A finite sum arises when you say "I have a function taking values $x_1,ldots,x_n$ on the index set ${1,ldots,n}$. Each index gets weight $1$" - and, of course, you can change those weights to get a weighted sum or you can extend the indexing set to every natural number to get an infinite sum. But, the basic thing to note is that there's a more general idea of integral that places summation as part of the theory of integration.






      share|cite|improve this answer









      $endgroup$


















        3












        $begingroup$

        It's certainly helpful to think of integrals this way, though not strictly correct. An integral takes all the little slivers of area beneath a curve and sums them up into a bigger area - though there's, of course, a lot of technicality needed to think about it this way.




        There is an idea being obscured by your idea of an integral as a sum, however. In truth, a sum is a kind of integral and not vice versa - this is somewhat counterintuitive given that sums are much more familiar objects than integrals, but there's an elegant theory known as Lebesgue integration which basically makes the integral a tool which eats two pieces of information:




        • We start with some indexing set and some way to "weigh" pieces of that set.


        • We have some function on that set.



        Then, the Lebesgue integral spits out the weighted "sum" of that function.



        An integral in the most common sense arises when you say, "I have a function on the real numbers, and I want an interval to have weight equal to its length." A finite sum arises when you say "I have a function taking values $x_1,ldots,x_n$ on the index set ${1,ldots,n}$. Each index gets weight $1$" - and, of course, you can change those weights to get a weighted sum or you can extend the indexing set to every natural number to get an infinite sum. But, the basic thing to note is that there's a more general idea of integral that places summation as part of the theory of integration.






        share|cite|improve this answer









        $endgroup$
















          3












          3








          3





          $begingroup$

          It's certainly helpful to think of integrals this way, though not strictly correct. An integral takes all the little slivers of area beneath a curve and sums them up into a bigger area - though there's, of course, a lot of technicality needed to think about it this way.




          There is an idea being obscured by your idea of an integral as a sum, however. In truth, a sum is a kind of integral and not vice versa - this is somewhat counterintuitive given that sums are much more familiar objects than integrals, but there's an elegant theory known as Lebesgue integration which basically makes the integral a tool which eats two pieces of information:




          • We start with some indexing set and some way to "weigh" pieces of that set.


          • We have some function on that set.



          Then, the Lebesgue integral spits out the weighted "sum" of that function.



          An integral in the most common sense arises when you say, "I have a function on the real numbers, and I want an interval to have weight equal to its length." A finite sum arises when you say "I have a function taking values $x_1,ldots,x_n$ on the index set ${1,ldots,n}$. Each index gets weight $1$" - and, of course, you can change those weights to get a weighted sum or you can extend the indexing set to every natural number to get an infinite sum. But, the basic thing to note is that there's a more general idea of integral that places summation as part of the theory of integration.






          share|cite|improve this answer









          $endgroup$



          It's certainly helpful to think of integrals this way, though not strictly correct. An integral takes all the little slivers of area beneath a curve and sums them up into a bigger area - though there's, of course, a lot of technicality needed to think about it this way.




          There is an idea being obscured by your idea of an integral as a sum, however. In truth, a sum is a kind of integral and not vice versa - this is somewhat counterintuitive given that sums are much more familiar objects than integrals, but there's an elegant theory known as Lebesgue integration which basically makes the integral a tool which eats two pieces of information:




          • We start with some indexing set and some way to "weigh" pieces of that set.


          • We have some function on that set.



          Then, the Lebesgue integral spits out the weighted "sum" of that function.



          An integral in the most common sense arises when you say, "I have a function on the real numbers, and I want an interval to have weight equal to its length." A finite sum arises when you say "I have a function taking values $x_1,ldots,x_n$ on the index set ${1,ldots,n}$. Each index gets weight $1$" - and, of course, you can change those weights to get a weighted sum or you can extend the indexing set to every natural number to get an infinite sum. But, the basic thing to note is that there's a more general idea of integral that places summation as part of the theory of integration.







          share|cite|improve this answer












          share|cite|improve this answer



          share|cite|improve this answer










          answered 2 hours ago









          Milo BrandtMilo Brandt

          39.6k475139




          39.6k475139























              1












              $begingroup$

              Yes, and no. In so much as the definite integral is a "sum" it is a limit of a Riemann sum as the "mesh" goes to zero. The "mesh" is the largest part of a partition. That is, your domain is broken up into parts over which you take the average value of your function, and multiply by the width of that part.



              It's typically helpful to think about definite integrals as sums over "infinitesimal" displacements, but strictly speaking, that is incorrect.






              share|cite|improve this answer









              $endgroup$


















                1












                $begingroup$

                Yes, and no. In so much as the definite integral is a "sum" it is a limit of a Riemann sum as the "mesh" goes to zero. The "mesh" is the largest part of a partition. That is, your domain is broken up into parts over which you take the average value of your function, and multiply by the width of that part.



                It's typically helpful to think about definite integrals as sums over "infinitesimal" displacements, but strictly speaking, that is incorrect.






                share|cite|improve this answer









                $endgroup$
















                  1












                  1








                  1





                  $begingroup$

                  Yes, and no. In so much as the definite integral is a "sum" it is a limit of a Riemann sum as the "mesh" goes to zero. The "mesh" is the largest part of a partition. That is, your domain is broken up into parts over which you take the average value of your function, and multiply by the width of that part.



                  It's typically helpful to think about definite integrals as sums over "infinitesimal" displacements, but strictly speaking, that is incorrect.






                  share|cite|improve this answer









                  $endgroup$



                  Yes, and no. In so much as the definite integral is a "sum" it is a limit of a Riemann sum as the "mesh" goes to zero. The "mesh" is the largest part of a partition. That is, your domain is broken up into parts over which you take the average value of your function, and multiply by the width of that part.



                  It's typically helpful to think about definite integrals as sums over "infinitesimal" displacements, but strictly speaking, that is incorrect.







                  share|cite|improve this answer












                  share|cite|improve this answer



                  share|cite|improve this answer










                  answered 2 hours ago









                  Steven HattonSteven Hatton

                  915418




                  915418






























                      draft saved

                      draft discarded




















































                      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.




                      draft saved


                      draft discarded














                      StackExchange.ready(
                      function () {
                      StackExchange.openid.initPostLogin('.new-post-login', 'https%3a%2f%2fmath.stackexchange.com%2fquestions%2f3091706%2fis-a-definite-integral-just-a-summation%23new-answer', 'question_page');
                      }
                      );

                      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







                      -

                      Popular posts from this blog

                      Bundesstraße 106

                      Image
                      Dieser Artikel beschreibt die Bundesstraße 106 in Deutschland. Zur gleichnamigen Straße in Österreich siehe Mölltal Straße. Vorlage:Infobox hochrangige Straße/Wartung/DE-B Bundesstraße 106 in Deutschland Karte Basisdaten Betreiber: Deutschland  Bundesrepublik Deutschland Straßenbeginn: Wismar ( 53° 54′  N , 11° 24′  O 53.900536 11.396875 ) Straßenende: Schwerin ( 53° 36′  N , 11° 24′  O 53.592785 11.404892 ) Gesamtlänge: 40,7 km Bundesland: Mecklenburg-Vorpommern Ausbauzustand: zweistreifig [1] Bundesstraße 106 in Schwerin (Umgehungsstraße) Straßenverlauf Land Mecklenburg-Vorpommern Landkreis Nordwestmecklenburg Ortsumgehung Wismar Wallensteingraben über   Dorf Mecklenburg Wallensteingraben Groß Stieten Bad Kleinen OT Niendorf Bahnstrecke Lübeck–Bad Kleinen Zickhusen Lübstorf Klein Trebbow OT Kirch Stück
                      Read more

                      Verónica Boquete

                      Image
                      Verónica Boquete im Trikot der Nationalmannschaft (2013) Personalia Name Verónica Boquete Giadans Geburtstag 9. April 1987 Geburtsort Santiago de Compostela, Spanien Größe 159 cm Position Mittelfeld / Sturm Juniorinnen Jahre Station 2001–2005 Xuventú Aguiño Frauen Jahre Station Spiele (Tore) 1 2005–2008 Prainsa Zaragoza 83 (40) 2008–2010 Espanyol Barcelona 53 (30) 2010 Buffalo Flash 9 0 (9) 2010 Chicago Red Stars 3 0 (1) 2010–2011 Espanyol Barcelona 26 (41) 2011 Philadelphia Independence 13 0 (5) 2011 Energija Woronesch 5 0 (1) 2012–2014 Tyresö FF 39 (14) 2014 Portland Thorns FC 15 0 (4) 2014–2015 1. FFC Frankfurt 23 0 (7) 2015–2016 FC Bayern München 9 0 (0) 2016–2018 Paris Saint-Germain 31 0 (8) 2018 Peking BG Phoenix 2019– Utah Royals FC 0 0 (0) Nationalmannschaft Jahre Auswahl
                      Read more

                      Ida-Boy-Ed-Garten

                      Image
                      Die Lage des Ida-Boy-Ed-Gartens, rot markiert Der Ida-Boy-Ed-Garten Der Ida-Boy-Ed-Garten, Blick von der Wakenitzmauer durch das Tor in der Stadtmauer Der Ida-Boy-Ed-Garten ist eine Straße der Lübecker Altstadt. Inhaltsverzeichnis 1 Lage 2 Geschichte 3 Literatur 4 Weblinks Lage | Der etwa 90 Meter lange Ida-Boy-Ed-Garten befindet sich an der nördlichen Spitze der Altstadtinsel, vor dem Burgtor. Die in einem Bogen durch eine Grünanlage hangaufwärts führende Straße verbindet die Wakenitzmauer mit der Burgtorbrücke. Geschichte | Der heutige Ida-Boy-Ed-Garten wurde ursprünglich als Verlängerung der Wakenitzmauer angelegt. 1903 wurde in den erhaltenen Teil der mittelalterlichen Stadtmauer, an dem die Wakenitzmauer bei der Einmündung der Kaiserstraße begann, ein Tor mit einem großen Bogen für die Durchführung der Straße und zwei kleineren seitlichen Öffnungen für Fußgänger gebrochen, um für die neu errichteten Wohnhäuser in diesem Bereich
                      Read more