Professional Documents
Culture Documents
(1)
Yet this is too often presented merely as the antiderivative of xn , or is derived using epsilonics, or in a few
lines via integration by parts -- with no attempt to motivate it for the easily visualized case where n is an
integer. (After drawing the illustrations for this page, and working out the arguments given on the pyramids and hypercubes
pages, I confess I acquired a lot of sympathy for authors who just "push symbols" to show this...)
On this page we present a simple motivation for the integral: It describes the volume of an n+1
dimensional hyperpyramid -- and that volume is something we can easily determine using geometry. In
short, the result is divided by n+1 because we can pack n+1 pyramids into an n dimensional hypercube --
so the volume of the cube, which is rn+1, is divided by n+1 to obtain the volume of a single pyramid. The
facts we need about hyperpyramids in order to understand this were developed on our hyperpyramids page
and our hypercubes page.
The rest of this page will be devoted to going into this in more detail. We'll give a purely geometric
derivation of equation (1) for all positive integers n, and then, using more traditional arguments, we'll
extend the result to cover fractional powers of x, rational powers of x, and finally arbitrary real powers of x.
The expression xn is the n-volume an n dimensional hypercube with length of Figure 4: Integral of x0
side x, as we discussed here. But if we "sweep" an n dimensional hypercube
along an axis perpendicular to itself, and grow it as we do so, we obtain an
n+1 dimensional hyperpyramid, as we discussed here. And the volume of
that pyramid is exactly what we obtain by integrating xn .
We can evaluate the integral of x1/n by turning it into an integral Figure 6: Integral of x1/n
of the inverse function, yn . See figure 6. The integral of yn , plus
the integral of x1/n , exactly fill the rectangle in the figure, which
has area r r1/n . Thus, we have
(3.1)
(3.2)
(4.3)
The integral on the right is a positive integer power of u, and we already know how to do that, so we
finally have
(4.4)
Note that, when m =1, this covers the case of a fractional power of x which we treated separately in section
3; we didn't actually need to treat that case separately. However, I like the graphic argument given above,
even though it doesn't cover all cases; the symbol-pushing we used here to prove the general case of xm/n
seems less satisfying to me.
For any real s , we can find rational values m/n which are arbitrarily close to s , and we can find xm/n for
each of them; we just define xs to be the limit of the sequence of values, xm/n , given a sequence of rational
numbers m/n which converges on s . In turn, the integral of xs is the limit of the sequence of integrals of
those values.
To make this concrete, given an arbitrary real number s , write out its (infinite) decimal expansion:
s = n.abcdefg....
We can find an example of a sequence of rational numbers which converges to s by chopping all but the
first decimal place for the first term, all but the the first two places for the second term, and so forth:
n. a
n.ab
n.abc
n.abcd
....
This sequence actually converges rather rapidly; on average each term is 1/10 as far from the "final value"
as the preceding term. After the first few terms, the "total change" in all terms for the entire rest of the
series is going to be very small.
The integral of xs, then, will be defined as the limit of a sequence of integrals:
It should be apparent that this sequence converges to a fixed value. If it isn't, pick a value for s , and draw
n.abcd...
a few curves representing the first few functions of the form x . Then look at the area under these
curves. It should be clear that, as we add decimal places, the area rapidly converges to a fixed value: the
changes caused by adding more decimal places rapidly become minuscule.
Furthermore, the values of the integrals given above, which we can find from the results of the previous
section, converge to exactly the result given by eqn (1):
The arguments in this section can be made rigorous without much difficulty, simply by taking the actual
limits in each case, but I don't think it adds a lot to the clarity of the explanation to do that, so I won't.
(We're already doing far too much "symbol pushing" on this page.)
For any positive values a and b, from the definition of the integral as the area under the curve, we have:
(6.1)
On the other hand, if either a or b is negative we may have a problem, in that fractional powers of negative
numbers are not generally real. Dealing with complex integrands is beyond the scope of this page, so for
negative bounds we will only consider integral powers of x.
To extend eqn (6.1) to negative bounds as well, all we need is to determine the integral from 0 to -r
where r is positive. From the definition of the integral, flipping the sign of the integrand flips the sign of the
integral, just as swapping the bounds does; so, for integer n, we have:
(6.2)
(Lemma 2)
Given:
(7.1)
Substitute:
(7.2)
where t is a nonzero number whose value we will specify later. We obtain:
(7.3)
(7.4)
In order to apply the result of section (6) to this, the exponent on u must be positive. Thus, we need to
choose t such that
(7.5)
We can certainly do that, as long as s ≠ 1. And then, applying our earlier results, we obtain
(7.6)