Evaluating Improper Integrals

Поделиться
HTML-код
  • Опубликовано: 7 фев 2025
  • When we learned about definite integrals, we saw that we can evaluate the antiderivative over the limits of integration to get a number, the area under the curve over that interval. But what if that interval is infinitely large? Rather surprisingly, an infinitely large interval can actually yield a finite area! Let's see how this works by checking out a variety of different improper integrals and attempting to evaluate them.
    Watch the whole Calculus playlist: bit.ly/ProfDave...
    Watch the whole Mathematics playlist: bit.ly/ProfDave...
    Classical Physics Tutorials: bit.ly/ProfDave...
    Modern Physics Tutorials: bit.ly/ProfDave...
    General Chemistry Tutorials: bit.ly/ProfDave...
    Organic Chemistry Tutorials: bit.ly/ProfDave...
    Biochemistry Tutorials: bit.ly/ProfDave...
    Biology Tutorials: bit.ly/ProfDaveBio
    EMAIL► ProfessorDaveExplains@gmail.com
    PATREON► / professordaveexplains
    Check out "Is This Wi-Fi Organic?", my book on disarming pseudoscience!
    Amazon: amzn.to/2HtNpVH
    Bookshop: bit.ly/39cKADM
    Barnes and Noble: bit.ly/3pUjmrn
    Book Depository: bit.ly/3aOVDlT

Комментарии • 102

  • @chris2656
    @chris2656 5 лет назад +185

    you have gotten me through my chem and math exams. I don't know what it is about your vids, but they're just so clear. Like when I'm struggling with something I always check for your vids first

    • @navjotsingh2251
      @navjotsingh2251 5 лет назад +31

      These videos are effective because:
      A) they are simple
      B) they use nice animations for demonstration
      C) he shows the necessary formulas
      This is something a lot of math lecturers fail to do when teaching.

    • @robinkovacic8145
      @robinkovacic8145 Год назад

      same thing, I was struggling with linear algebra and almost failed my midterms regardless of countless hours of studying. once I discovered his linear algebra playlist, everything changed

    • @betterfly7398
      @betterfly7398 10 месяцев назад

      Clear wording & phrasing (every word is accounted for).
      Clear voice (Doesn't speak too fast, emphasizes important words/phrases).
      Great Animations.

  • @kiwisorbet
    @kiwisorbet 4 года назад +49

    Excellent and clear content. You have helped me go through calc 1 with a horrible teacher. You're always the first one I reach to when I need to learn Calculus. When I graduate and find a job, I'll for sure donate you 30$ for helping me so much in my studies.

    • @Divine_Discoveries
      @Divine_Discoveries 2 года назад +2

      did you graduate and in what field what are you doing?

    • @kiwisorbet
      @kiwisorbet 2 года назад +11

      @@Divine_Discoveries haven't graduated yet, but I'm in my second year into my electrical engineering bachelors

  • @rozhinaraoufi8545
    @rozhinaraoufi8545 6 лет назад +21

    professor Dave, you are the light of my life

  • @egelsia7009
    @egelsia7009 4 года назад +9

    Hey Proffessor, I have an exam next week and you made me understood nearly all of the subjects. Thank you for everything, have a nice year ♥

  • @daisyg509
    @daisyg509 2 года назад +3

    Thank youuuu. I have seen this in calc 2, audited calc 2 and still didn't understand UNTIL I watched this video. This was one of the few calc 2 concepts I did not understand well.

  • @anysianas5099
    @anysianas5099 4 года назад +38

    You make me love maths more and more your explanations are so clear easy to understand prof Dave thank you 🙏🏾

  • @derplerp8412
    @derplerp8412 2 года назад +2

    I have an exam tmr and my teacher is not the greatest but because of you I might do well now

  • @graced4844
    @graced4844 Год назад +1

    subscribing because even though my calculus prof teaches fine, we go way too fast and i always need help. thanks dave!

  • @JesusMartinez-zu3xl
    @JesusMartinez-zu3xl 2 года назад +3

    wow! You explained this concept better than my cal instructor in 13 minutes! Thank you!

  • @heeberman
    @heeberman 7 месяцев назад

    Loved your explanation for the arctan limit. This was a confusion I had from a lecture last night and I just stumbled upon this in your video serendipitously.

  • @bathtubanarchy
    @bathtubanarchy Год назад +1

    6:10 I don't recall seeing this common integration mentioned before?

  • @bernardnyarkoh1798
    @bernardnyarkoh1798 4 года назад +5

    Waaaw, Professor you have really enlightened my understanding. God bless you

  • @hoangvietphu8467
    @hoangvietphu8467 6 лет назад +7

    i love your math videos please make them more regularly!

    • @matemaatika-math
      @matemaatika-math 4 года назад +3

      If you pay him more regularly he has more options to buy time for making videos more regularly. Or we can make it possible for him and why not for everyone to get free access to all the necessary resources.

  • @Pochix2024
    @Pochix2024 3 года назад +2

    You are truly a savior Prof Dave♥️

  • @kimberlyhoang5191
    @kimberlyhoang5191 4 года назад +1

    i like how you went in depth about certain parts. It was very easy to understand.

  • @gilesrobinson4066
    @gilesrobinson4066 3 года назад +1

    This explanation was a lot better than the one at my uni, thanks

  • @Kiky_MedPhysicist
    @Kiky_MedPhysicist 5 месяцев назад

    Thank you sir for your dedication and for making this free! 🙏

  • @IronMan-di3zi
    @IronMan-di3zi 3 года назад +3

    Sir your explanation is great. I especially liked the way you taught here with geometrical interpretation which I was looking for ❤️❤️ Thank you sir for this amazing content

  • @OwlFatherTarnished
    @OwlFatherTarnished Год назад

    Bro an absolute life saver

  • @michelsupply5328
    @michelsupply5328 3 года назад +1

    SIr Love from India,,,,,,,,,,,,,,
    Sir i was doubt on this topic but still i understood perfectly...............

  • @codexhd8689
    @codexhd8689 3 года назад +1

    Nice explanation. Watching from zambia

  • @katherynew
    @katherynew 5 лет назад +4

    Excellent simplification of this rather nebulous concept complicated by wordy textbooks!

  • @schifoso
    @schifoso 6 лет назад +11

    Excellent examples.

    • @goducksgo613
      @goducksgo613 5 лет назад +2

      Yes, the one where the area was pi blew up my mind

  • @mrhunterai...331
    @mrhunterai...331 6 месяцев назад

    Just came across this channel if you want to master calc I 100% recommend you watch it.

  • @spnfangirl67
    @spnfangirl67 3 года назад +2

    thanks professor dave you're the best!

  • @tenma628
    @tenma628 4 месяца назад

    its 12am and i have a calc exam tmrw im not prepared for. thank u for this video

  • @ilovecalculus2807
    @ilovecalculus2807 4 года назад +1

    Yay! Thank you very much.. May God bless you and your family.

  • @payalsagar1808
    @payalsagar1808 5 лет назад +2

    crystal clear explanation🙌

  • @issacoh8675
    @issacoh8675 3 года назад +4

    Quick question: At 9:34, shouldn't the bounds be changed since you are using u-substitution. I know that they will change back after that step, but for that specific step, shouldn't the bounds be different or are they supposed to stay the same?

    • @michaellee7778
      @michaellee7778 3 года назад +3

      The bounds should be different. The upper bound will become 3 (since x - 2 = u , 5 - 2 = 3) and the lower bound becomes t - 2.

    • @calebknight8213
      @calebknight8213 2 года назад +4

      I believe the reason he didn’t change the limits of integration is because he substituted x-2 back in for u after taking the integral. Normally with u-sub on definite integrals you don’t plug your original substitution back in, so you need to change the limits with respect to u. Because he changed his function back to x values, there was no need to change the limits of integration.

  • @SurajKumar-ey2et
    @SurajKumar-ey2et 9 месяцев назад

    5:15 i didn't understand what he meant by saying " One over x squared gets small enough fast enough that the area under the curve is finite, while one over x also gets small enough, as it too, goes to zero as x approaches infinity, it just doesn't do it fast enough "

  • @oshawastaken
    @oshawastaken 4 года назад

    DAVE U ARE A GODSEND

  • @asema.1484
    @asema.1484 4 года назад +1

    love this guy he is briliant

  • @vaiterius
    @vaiterius 3 года назад +2

    Who made your intro sequence? it is legendary

    • @ian.ambrose
      @ian.ambrose 3 года назад

      He made it himself. He is an animator too.

  • @hellboy4167
    @hellboy4167 Год назад

    You are still saving your students degree😭💯

  • @brunomartel4639
    @brunomartel4639 3 года назад

    in 5:14 you forgot to put the limit of t that tends to inf in the rhs

  • @ThePolarOpposite
    @ThePolarOpposite 6 месяцев назад +2

    I sing the jingle involuntarily

  • @utilizator1701
    @utilizator1701 3 года назад

    9:36 you have forgotten to change the limits of the integral (it should be from t-2 to 3).

    • @dangyo962
      @dangyo962 3 года назад

      true but it doesn't matter because he switched u back into x - 2

  • @veliamomo6561
    @veliamomo6561 3 года назад

    Great Teacher, thank you

  • @suyogadhikari2349
    @suyogadhikari2349 3 года назад

    This video is amazinggggg!!

  • @matemaatika-math
    @matemaatika-math 4 года назад +1

    I hope that this time you wouldn't argue that there's a part that needs to be corrected at 11:39: You must put parenthesis around 3 * t ^ 3 as otherwise, t ^ 3 would be part of the nominator or whatever you English-speaking crowd call the fraction part or the part that's on top of the fraction line. According to your notation we can read -1 / 3 * t ^ 3 === -t ^ 3 / 3.

  • @nirajkc224
    @nirajkc224 5 лет назад +1

    So cool professor

  • @Schlohmotion
    @Schlohmotion 5 лет назад +2

    11:33 dx/x^4 .... does this stand for 1/x^4 dx ?

    • @ProfessorDaveExplains
      @ProfessorDaveExplains  5 лет назад +5

      yep same thing!

    • @Schlohmotion
      @Schlohmotion 5 лет назад +2

      @@ProfessorDaveExplains Professors seem to answer faster than teachers, neat! Thank you.

  • @LaGGSBD
    @LaGGSBD 5 лет назад +1

    8:13 couldn't you get 360 as the result if you used degrees instead of radians?

    • @ProfessorDaveExplains
      @ProfessorDaveExplains  5 лет назад +2

      we always use radians in such a context because pi is a value that makes sense in terms of an area whereas degrees do not. also, pi is 180 degrees anyway.

  • @elamvaluthis7268
    @elamvaluthis7268 2 года назад

    Very nice explanation 😂🤣🤣😄🙏👍.

  • @tunabozkurt5578
    @tunabozkurt5578 3 года назад

    I love this guy 😝

  • @esramazlan7445
    @esramazlan7445 6 лет назад +1

    Thanks sir

  • @jursamaj
    @jursamaj 3 года назад

    It should not be surprising that the integral of 1/(1+x^2) is convergent. Over the span from 0 to 1, it clearly has a finite area. Meanwhile over the span 1 to ∞, it is always less than 1/x^2, which is convergent.

  • @Vagdebrume
    @Vagdebrume 6 лет назад +5

    You're still awesome :)

    • @Vagdebrume
      @Vagdebrume 6 лет назад +3

      And video is a really good way to teach maths :)

  • @bikram_kumar
    @bikram_kumar 3 года назад

    We can use the L'Hospital's Rule for evaluating the limit, instead of checking the graph for the limit values ;)

  • @s-semane
    @s-semane 5 лет назад +5

    i have many questions anyway!

  • @yagzyalcntas553
    @yagzyalcntas553 4 года назад

    how about partial integration for improper integrals? the uv part is calculated using the limits? or just left as it is?

  • @bobthebb-illder827
    @bobthebb-illder827 4 года назад +1

    8:28

  • @jumanahabiballa6258
    @jumanahabiballa6258 2 года назад

    Thankss Dave 😏

  • @farrukhsaif108
    @farrukhsaif108 4 года назад +2

    Here for a math calc 1 uni exam

  • @freefiregamer-st5wu
    @freefiregamer-st5wu 2 года назад +1

    sir you are from which country?

  • @zeinabmohamed1668
    @zeinabmohamed1668 2 года назад

    استفدت جدا الحمد الله

  • @brxyann
    @brxyann 3 года назад

    Legend

  • @edison9581
    @edison9581 3 года назад

    Hi professor, how come the solution of tan^-1(0) is not 0 + n(pi), but is just 0?

    • @hana29971
      @hana29971 3 года назад

      I think that's because we only take the minimum values and if we write it as n(pi) it might complicate the results

  • @matemaatika-math
    @matemaatika-math 4 года назад +2

    Here at 6:18, you're using ambiguous notation again as also Krista King does however I remember her mentioning that one must be sure of the context before reading. So if you use -1 for arcustangens then your saying can be interpreted as cotangens as well. I suggest to write directly arctan and not using the inverse notation. I suggest arctan and even not atan as I've seen you using atan earlier in the meaning of a * tan as you told me that multiplication was implied on adjacent terms. How in our holy green world can we know that you mean tangent and not three terms t, a and n which are multiplied together? Because nobody past like fourth degree of something thinks that way?

  • @ian.ambrose
    @ian.ambrose 3 года назад

    Thank you Jesus Dave Professor.

  • @TheLilLebs
    @TheLilLebs 6 лет назад +2

    i love you

  • @dennisemacapagal4331
    @dennisemacapagal4331 Год назад

    From chemistry jesus to mathematics/calculus jesus

  • @rojaponduru4106
    @rojaponduru4106 6 лет назад +3

    Please say easily

  • @payalsagar1808
    @payalsagar1808 5 лет назад +1

    just mazing:)😘

  • @apurbasharma
    @apurbasharma 3 года назад

    you are fucking amazing

  • @dailyrosesofholyquran780
    @dailyrosesofholyquran780 Год назад

    👍

    • @SurajKumar-ey2et
      @SurajKumar-ey2et 9 месяцев назад

      5:15 i didn't understand what he meant by saying " One over x squared gets small enough fast enough that the area under the curve is finite, while one over x also gets small enough, as it too, goes to zero as x approaches infinity, it just doesn't do it fast enough

  • @GavenYurisich-nu5zn
    @GavenYurisich-nu5zn Год назад

    A bandai

  • @matemaatika-math
    @matemaatika-math 4 года назад +1

    I've found yet another ambiguous notation, this time a verbal one at 7:38. It's hilarious that we get a whole pie altogether however what we get here, isn't a pie but it's a something that you represent with a Greek letter that will be pronounced as "pee", so half-pee and half-pee are a whole pee and if we want to illustrate that area we could color is after pee as it's full of pee. But whose pee is blue? Because it's a blueberry pie.

  • @celinejeni5629
    @celinejeni5629 6 лет назад +1

    nc sir

  • @davethesid8960
    @davethesid8960 4 года назад

    But pi isn't finite! 🙄

    • @ProfessorDaveExplains
      @ProfessorDaveExplains  4 года назад +3

      Um, yes it is.

    • @davethesid8960
      @davethesid8960 4 года назад +1

      @@ProfessorDaveExplains Wow, thanks for replying, I was just saying that although it IS a finite value, it cannot be written out at its full capacity... Eh, as kind of a joking around

    • @ProfessorDaveExplains
      @ProfessorDaveExplains  4 года назад +5

      Ah, yes, it's irrational.

    • @davethesid8960
      @davethesid8960 4 года назад +1

      @@ProfessorDaveExplains And also thanks for such a clear explanation about integration. Your way of teaching is just sooo different (in a positive sense) from plain old scholar education, I love it! ❤

    • @davethesid8960
      @davethesid8960 4 года назад +2

      @@ProfessorDaveExplains Actually I'm so keen on maths that I decided I would like to become a maths professor one day too, hope I'll achieve this goal.

  • @IbrarKhan-fb9ze
    @IbrarKhan-fb9ze 4 года назад

    Thanks sir