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

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

Is this seat taken?

100 people are waiting to board a plane. The first person’s ticket says Seat 1; the second person in line has a ticket that says Seat 2, and so on until the 100th person, whose ticket says Seat 100. The first person ignores the fact that his ticket says Seat 1, and randomly chooses one of the hundred seats (note: he might randomly choose to sit in Seat 1). From this point on, the next 98 people will always sit in their assigned seats if possible; if their seat is taken, they will randomly choose one of the remaining seats (after the first person, the second person takes a seat; after the second person, the third person takes a seat, and so on). What is the probability the 100th person sits in Seat 100? This problem can be solved intuitively. The first step to solve this problem is to understand that the last person will either get his seat or the first person's seat. But why? If the 1st person chooses 1st seat itself, everybody gets their own seat (i.e., the last person will g...
Post a Comment
Read more

Understanding logarithmic functions for complex numbers

Imaginary numbers are not 'imaginary'. Real numbers are not 'real'. In fact, they're both in our heads... We are quite familiar with the logarithmic function. We define it as the inverse of the exponential function. That is, we say: $$\log{e^x} = e^{\log{x}} = x$$ (In fact, this is how the inverse of a function is even defined.) Now, we're all comfortable with the natural log. We use it for various results, but we always keep in mind that the number we're evaluating is POSITIVE. Why though? Let's consider some negative number $a$. What does it mean to take it's natural logarithm? It means to find a number such that $e$ raised to that number gives $a$. And surely since $e$ raised to any power always gives a positive value, it makes no sense to take the log of a negative number, right? Right? Complex Numbers: Function Domains Remember how we  extended  the existence of real numbers to the complex number system? What did we do? ...
Post a Comment
Read more