integrate by partial fractions, not sure,. i want to integrate 1/((x^2*(x^2-15)) should i do partial fraction 1/((x^2*(x^2-15)) = A / x + B/x^2 + C/(x-sqrt 15) + D/(x+sqrt 15) , or 1/((x^2*(x^2-15)) = A / x + B/x^2 + Cx+d / ( x^2 - 15)
why don't you type in math. will help in viewing easily.
the second one is the right way. How do you hope getting radicals will help the partial fraction??(Indeed, we use partial fractions for simplification!!!)
hello
whats wrong with partial fractions with radicals?
i dont see any problem with the first way
no problems but we avoid it as calculations get messy.
my computer does the partial fractions integral 1/(x^2 (x^2-15)) = -1/(15x^2) + 1/(15(x^2-15))
yah...that "seems" easy :) you can always take x^2=y during partial fracs.. then u get 1/(y(y-15)) which can be easily split into fracs.
that doesnt disobey partial fractions rule
i thought it was , it had to be linear factors and irreducibles
like A/x + B/x^2 + C / (x-sqrt 15) + D/(x+sqrt 15)
See...there are no so-called rules...at least not for me :) if we take radicals the math is correct but its unconventional
cx+d is supposed to be only for irreducibles, i thought
like integral 1/x(x^2+1) = A/x + bx+c / x^2 + 1
so youre saying 1/x(x^2-1) = A/x + (bx+c) /( x^2 - 1)
not only for irreducibles,
im pretty sure thats what the theorem states
maybe the theorem u saw said that we cx+d for irreducibles but it did not say that we cant use cx+d for non-irreducibles!!
we use cx+d for irreducibles but we can also use it like (bx+c)/(x^2-1). Here the math is correct. But splitting like A/(x+1)+B/(x-1) is more advantageous, as it gives a good form whose integral is known.
for example, this partial fractions fails 1/(x^2 (x-5) ) = A/x^2 + B/(x-5) , this fails
oh because of the A/x + B/x^2
yes
hmmm
ok so 1/[(x-a)^n (x^2 +bx +c)^n] = k1/(x-a) + k2/(x-a)^2 + ... kn/(x-a)^n + m1x+p1/(x^2 +bx +c) +...
your upto kn is ok. but from m1,p1,...its getting complicated.
yeah im running out of letters
no. there will be cx+d term above and the denominator's power will increase from 1 to n
1/[(x-a)^n (x^2 +bx +c)^n] = A1/(x-a) + A2/(x-a)^2 + ... An/(x-a)^n + B1x+C1/(x^2 +bx +c) + (B2x +C2)/(x^2 +bx + c)^2... +
1/[(x-a)^n (x^2 +bx +c)^n] = A1/(x-a) + A2/(x-a)^2 + ... An/(x-a)^n + B1x+C1/(x^2 +bx +c) + (B2x +C2)/(x^2 +bx + c)^2... +(Bnx +Cn) / (x^2 +bx +c)^n
your c1 and b1 terms are wrong
why?
there won't be any b1x ... also instead of c1 write it as b1x+c1
1/[(x-a)^n (x^2 +bx +c)^n] = A1/(x-a) + A2/(x-a)^2 + ... An/(x-a)^n + (B1x+C1)/(x^2 +bx +c) + (B2x +C2)/(x^2 +bx + c)^2... +(Bnx +Cn) / (x^2 +bx +c)^n
yups. thats correct....:)
so thats fine?
oh i left out the parenthesees
ok so thats fine for partial fractions , and x^2 +bx + c doesnt necessarily have to be irreducible,
see..make sure that you know that WE USE cx+d in numerator FOR IRREDUCIBLES (in other words polynomials have only complex roots). WE COULD use cx+d also above REDUCIBLES since it is mathematically correct but don't use it as one of the partial fractions is not in its lowest degrees (i.e. cx+d over a reducible is NOT recommended) But if such a use simplifies a problem at hand then why not use it? Understand me?
a reducible quadratic you mean
reducible into linear factors
yups yups a QUADRATIC can only have cx+d above it. yes reducible into linear REAL factors. Nobody wants to have complex factors here!
ok, so then we could do 1/(x^2 (x^2 - 15)) , we could reduce it
im doing 1 / ( x ( x^2 + 2x + 1) ) the latter is reducible, but im not going to . = AX+b / ( x^2 + 2x + 1) + C / x
Mathematically permissible. But not recommended.
ok lets try this one 1/ ( x (x^2+2x+1)) integrate that using parfrac
int 1/ ( x (x^2+2x+1))= (AX+b) / ( x^2 + 2x + 1) + C / x
in part fracs.. its (1/x)+((-x-2)/(x^2+2x+1)) the first term gives log|x| and the second make substitution x^2+2x=y
right, or we could have factored x^2 + 2x + 1
yes...
wait thats wrong
whats that substitution ?
yupss....the subs wrong...
we can do it however
oh by the way, partial fraction doesnt help us with say 1/ (x^(3/2) (x-15))
no.. since the denominator is not a POLYNOMIAL
, ahh
both numer. and denom. must be polynomials
wait is that a precondition?
you could have 1/(x*(x^2-sqrt 3)) for example
YES partial fractions can help ONLY TO RATIONAL FUNCTIONS i.e. both numeratoer and denominator polynomials with denominator not being the zero polynomial
ok
just clearing that up
by the way what's your age?
25
why do i sound dumb
hahha..joking? i hope u understood.. ask for doubts...
i am 17
oh
jeez, i thought you were older. you are wise beyond your years :)
are you a mathematician? or math-related worker? u named urself cantorset...
yes im a math tutor
for a living, i was stumped because the student didnt want to reduce a quadratic
and i thought, hey the theorem says so and so
it was reducible into irrational factors
the question u asked me? - yes it can be solved both ways
see this problem we just did its a lot easier if we reduce the quadratic
integral (1/(x(x^2+2x+1))
yes its lot easier if we reduce quad... but i argued just because i wanted to show that cx+d hold good for reducible quadratics also..
right so i guess it depends on the problem
well its good to know the power of this theorem
which area of math are you specialized in?
i tutor mostly calculus ,
wow..thats awesome..i love calculus..but know little..struggling still with single variable calculus
youre amazing :)
well if you need help, give me a buzz
ok..thank you.
so yeah, this one is tougher to integrate , without reducing the quadratic
integral (1/x)+((-x-2)/(x^2+2x+1))
yups.
so the original question integral 1/(x^2 (x^2-15))
then reducing the quadratic is worse, lol
x^2=y, integr=(1/15)log|(y-15)/y|+constant
then you need 2x dx = dy
oh its not so simple ,
i.e. integral=\[\frac{1}{15}\ln \left| \frac{x^2-15}{x^2} \right|+constant\]
when you make a substitution, you have to do dy = 2x dx
SORRY!! out of my mind......u r right..
then we have another problem
Join our real-time social learning platform and learn together with your friends!