Skip to main content

Why does integration give the area under the curve?

The definite integral between two points $a$ and $b$ gives the area under the curve for the function between $a$ and $b$, textbooks say.

A question arises - how?

I had this doubt when I started to learn calculus in my school. And I decided to set out to prove it.

Consider a function $\operatorname{f}$, and its derivative $\operatorname{f'}$. We have to prove that
$\int_a^b \operatorname{f'}(x) = $ Area under the curve for $\operatorname{f'}(x)$ between $a$ and $b$
Let Area under the curve for $\operatorname{f'}(x)$ between $a$ and $b$ = $S$
Divide the shaded region into parts of very very small width $\delta \to 0$. Each part can be considered as a rectangle of width $\delta$ and height $\operatorname{f'}(c)$ where $c$ is the $x$ coordinate of the graph, $a\le c\le b$.
$$\therefore S = \lim_{\delta \to 0}\Bigl(\delta \times \operatorname{f'}(a) + \delta \times \operatorname{f'}(a+\delta) + \delta \times \operatorname{f'}(a+2\delta) +...\\+ \delta \times \operatorname{f'}(b-\delta) + \delta \times \operatorname{f'}(b)\Bigr)$$
From definition,
$$\operatorname{f'}(a+n\delta) = \lim_{\delta \to 0}\frac{\operatorname{f}(a+(n+1)\delta) - \operatorname{f}(a+n\delta)}{\delta}$$
$$\operatorname{f'}(b-n\delta) = \lim_{\delta \to 0}\frac{\operatorname{f}(b-(n-1)\delta) - \operatorname{f}(b-n\delta)}{\delta}$$
Substituting in $S$,
$$S = \lim_{\delta \to 0}\Biggl( \Bigl(\operatorname{f}(a+\delta) - \operatorname{f}(a)\Bigr) +  \Bigl(\operatorname{f}(a+2\delta) - \operatorname{f}(a+\delta)\Bigr) +   \Bigl(\operatorname{f}(a+3\delta) - \operatorname{f}(a+2\delta)\Bigr) +...\\+  \Bigl(\operatorname{f}(b) - \operatorname{f}(b-\delta)\Bigr) +  \Bigl(\operatorname{f}(b+\delta) - \operatorname{f}(b)\Bigr)  \Biggr)$$
Cancelling the terms,
$$S =  \lim_{\delta \to 0}\Bigl(\operatorname{f}(b+\delta) - \operatorname{f}(a)\Bigr) = \operatorname{f}(b) - \operatorname{f}(a) = \int_a^b \operatorname{f'}(x) $$
Thus we have successfully proved that the definite integral between two points $a$ and $b$ gives the area under the curve for the function between $a$ and $b$.
Labels:

Comments

Post a Comment

Popular posts from this blog

Factorials, and the Gamma Function

What is the Gamma function? What does it have to do with the factorial of a number? And why does such a formula even work? The Factorial In our high school combinatorics course, we were introduced to the factorial of a natural number. We defined the factorial of a number $n$ to be the product of all the natural numbers till $n$. Or symbolically: $$n! = 1 . 2 . 3 ... (n-2)  (n-1)  n$$ This is a very useful function in Counting problems. This function also pops up in the exponential function: $$e^x = 1+\frac{x}{1!}+\frac{x^2}{2!}+\frac{x^3}{3!}+...$$ Setting this aside, we think: can we 'extend' this function to all real number? Surely, even if we were to come up with such a function, what would it mean to take this new 'factorial' of some real number? Well, let's take a look at one important property of the factorial function: $$n! = n(n-1)!$$ and this is true for all natural numbers $n$. So, even if we came up with this homologous function, we...
Post a Comment
Read more

The $\operatorname{erf}$ function

Can a function be 'defined' as the anti-derivative of another function? $\operatorname{erf}$ is one such function. Even though it has various proper infinite series expansions (as in Wolfram MathWorld - Erf ), it is defined by mathematicians as such: $$\operatorname{erf}(z) \equiv \frac{2}{\sqrt{\pi}}\int_0^ze^{-t^2}dt$$ This function has extensive implications in statistics, and can be used to express the integral of $e^{-x^2}$ and $e^{x^2}$. See the post that tries to find  integral of $e^{x^2}$  - we need not use integration by parts there, but rather can use the $\operatorname{erf}$ function. Source: Wolfram MathWorld
Post a Comment
Read more

Why $y^2 = x^3 + 7$ has no integral solutions?

Consider the given equation... $$y^2-7=x^3=(x^{\frac{3}{2}})^2$$ $$y^2-(x^{\frac{3}{2}})^2=7$$ If $x^{\frac{3}{2}}$ is a decimal, then $y$ should also be some decimal to make the equation an integer, i.e., $7$. So $y$ will be a decimal in this case. But consider when $x^{\frac{3}{2}}$ is an integer. The only integers whose difference of squares is $7$, is $4$ and $3$ (why?). $$4^2 - 3^2 =7$$ But compare it to the equation $y^2-(x^{\frac{3}{2}})^2=7$. Then $$x^{\frac{3}{2}} = 3$$ $$x = 3^{\frac{2}{3}}$$ But here $x$ is a decimal! Therefore, at least one of the variables $x$ and $y$ is a decimal in the given equation, thus proving the fact that it has no integral solutions.
Post a Comment
Read more