Problem 1 is Exercise 7.1.36 from the book. Here is a graph showing the curve for

We rotate about the line the region bounded by the -axis and this curve.

To find its volume, a first natural attempt would be to use the washer method. We would then attempt to compute the volume as

where is the maximum of for and, for any given value of with and are the values of with such that

Unfortunately, this does not seem to be the best approach, as there does not seem to be a reasonable way of solving for the equation

(In fact, this equation cannot be solved in terms of elementary functions.

Similarly, there is no way of finding exactly what the value of is in terms of elementary functions.)

Since this approach seems to lead us nowhere, we now try to compute the volume using the shell method. Now the volume is expressed as

This expression looks approachable with the techniques we have studied. First, let’s rewrite the integral as

We compute both expressions using integration by parts:

To find we use and so and we can take Hence

We recognize from the graph of that the second expression is zero, and we have:

Similarly, for we have and so and and

The last expression is once more computed using parts, now with and so and This gives

Hence

Finally, the required volume is

Problem 2 asked to evaluate

A first attempt may go by using integration by parts, with and Unfortunately, this approach would not lead to simpler expressions, as both integrals and derivatives of and carry radicals.

If the expression inside the square root were of the form or we could use a trigonometric substitution. However, is not of this form. On the other hand, in Chapter 9 we saw that it is sometimes useful to complete squares, so we may want to try that here. We have:

This suggest trying the trigonometric substitution for We have and Also, when we have or and when we have or

In terms of the integral becomes

To evaluate expressions of this form, we use the identity and obtain

The second expression we recognize as For the first, we use either the reduction formula found in lecture, or integration by parts:

or

from which we get

Finally,

so the required integral equals

Typeset using LaTeX2WP. Here is a printable version of this post.

43.614000-116.202000

Advertisements

Like this:

LikeLoading...

Related

This entry was posted on Sunday, October 18th, 2009 at 1:27 pm and is filed under 175: Calculus II. You can follow any responses to this entry through the RSS 2.0 feed.
You can leave a response, or trackback from your own site.

Craig: For a while, there was some research on improving bounds on the number of variables or degree of unsolvable Diophantine equations. Unfortunately, I never got around to cataloging the known results in any systematic way, so all I can offer is some pointers to relevant references, but I am not sure of what the current records are. Perhaps the first pape […]

Yes. Consider, for instance, Conway's base 13 function $c$, or any function that is everywhere discontinuous and has range $\mathbb R$ in every interval. Pick continuous bijections $f_n:\mathbb R\to(-1/n,1/n)$ for $n\in\mathbb N^+$. Pick a strictly decreasing sequence $(x_n)_{n\ge1}$ converging to $0$. Define $f$ by setting $f(x)=0$ if $x=0$ or $\pm x_n […]

(1) Patrick Dehornoy gave a nice talk at the Séminaire Bourbaki explaining Hugh Woodin's approach. It omits many technical details, so you may want to look at it before looking again at the Notices papers. I think looking at those slides and then at the Notices articles gives a reasonable picture of what the approach is and what kind of problems remain […]

The description below comes from József Beck. Combinatorial games. Tic-tac-toe theory, Encyclopedia of Mathematics and its Applications, 114. Cambridge University Press, Cambridge, 2008, MR2402857 (2009g:91038). Given a finite set $S$ of points in the plane $\mathbb R^2$, consider the following game between two players Maker and Breaker. The players alternat […]

Yes. This is a consequence of the Davis-Matiyasevich-Putnam-Robinson work on Hilbert's 10th problem, and some standard number theory. A number of papers have details of the $\Pi^0_1$ sentence. To begin with, take a look at the relevant paper in Mathematical developments arising from Hilbert's problems (Proc. Sympos. Pure Math., Northern Illinois Un […]

It is easy to see without choice that if there is a surjection from $A$ onto $B$, then there is an injection from ${\mathcal P}(B)$ into ${\mathcal P}(A)$, and the result follows from Cantor's theorem that $B

Only noticed this question today. Although the selected answer is quite nice and arguably simpler than the argument below, none of the posted answers address what appeared to be the original intent of establishing the inequality using the Arithmetic Mean-Geometric Mean Inequality. For this, simply notice that $$ 1+3+\ldots+(2n-1)=n^2, $$ which can be easily […]

First of all, $f(z)+e^z\ne 0$ by the first inequality. It follows that $e^z/(f(z)+e^z)$ is entire, and bounded above. You should be able to conclude from that.

Yes. The standard way of defining these sequences goes by assigning in an explicit fashion to each limit ordinal $\alpha$, for as long as possible, an increasing sequence $\alpha_n$ that converges to $\alpha$. Once this is done, we can define $f_\alpha$ by diagonalizing, so $f_\alpha(n)=f_{\alpha_n}(n)$ for all $n$. Of course there are many possible choices […]

I disagree with the advice of sending a paper to a journal before searching the relevant literature. It is almost guaranteed that a paper on the fundamental theorem of algebra (a very classical and well-studied topic) will be rejected if you do not include mention on previous proofs, and comparisons, explaining how your proof differs from them, etc. It is no […]