Re: Very simple question/paradox about integrals.
- From: gwenael.mezzalira@xxxxxxxxx
- Date: Sat, 24 May 2008 05:51:17 -0700 (PDT)
An integral sign without any bound doesn't have any proper sense.
Try it with :
int_g(a)^g(b) f(u)du=int_a^b f(g(x))g'(x)dx and u=g(x)
On 24 mai, 13:03, gtsav...@xxxxxxxxx wrote:
The following is any bound doesn't have any proper sensetrue:http://i215.photobucket.com/albums/cc34/Crocodile13/we1.jpg
So after applying it to a function we have:http://i215.photobucket.com/albums/cc34/Crocodile13/we2.jpg
Something is clearly wrong. There is something, somewhere, that i
miss. But where is it?
----------------------
----------------------
Sorry that you have to copy and paste the images to be shown but i
don't know if IMG tags work here.
Test(ignore it):
[IMG]http://i215.photobucket.com/albums/cc34/Crocodile13/we2.jpg[/IMG]
----------------------
----------------------
.
- References:
- Very simple question/paradox about integrals.
- From: gtsavdar
- Very simple question/paradox about integrals.
- Prev by Date: Re: Mobius Transformation / S Commutes with T if they have same fixed point
- Next by Date: MURDEROUSMATHS
- Previous by thread: Very simple question/paradox about integrals.
- Next by thread: Re: Very simple question/paradox about integrals.
- Index(es):