In article <20080413185542.933$x5@[EMAIL PROTECTED]
>,
David W. Cantrell <DWCantrell@[EMAIL PROTECTED]
> wrote:
>magidin@[EMAIL PROTECTED]
(Arturo Magidin) wrote:
>> In article
>> <b7abb054-6631-4a8c-bac7-155cfd867e57@[EMAIL PROTECTED]
>,
>> J.Agustin <calero565@[EMAIL PROTECTED]
> wrote:
>> >Find f(x)=int(1/(1+(sint)^2) , t=a , t=x)
>
>Opening parenthesis ^ inserted.
>
>> I could have sworn I already passed my Calc II course; why are you
>> assigning me homework from that course?
>>
>> Perhaps you meant to ASK for help? Then you shouldn't type your humble
>> requests as orders.
>>
>> But since you ask so nicely, it happens to be Integral number 342
>> (with a=b=c=1) in the Table of Indefinite Integrals of the CRC
>> Standard Mathematical Tables and Formulae, 31st Edition.
>
>That doesn't help much. That result is the same as what one gets from
>Weierstrass substitution, namely, an antiderivative which is not valid on
>the whole real line.
>
>The _definite_ integral desired is obviously defined for _all_ real x.
>
>What really puzzles me is why J.Agustin posted his question again here!
>Presumably his question has already been thoroughly answered in his
recent
>sci.math thread "integral". (See the responses there by Slavek and me.)
Oh, the answer to that seems trivial to me: while you gave enough
information for someone with half a clue to obtain the full answer,
you did NOT do all of the work for him. So he was hoping someone else
would.
You know: you cooked the food, but you failed to both chew
it and digest it for him before serving it. He still has to do some
work beyond just copying the answer.
--
======================================================================
"It's not denial. I'm just very selective about
what I accept as reality."
--- Calvin ("Calvin and Hobbes" by Bill Watterson)
======================================================================
Arturo Magidin
magidin-at-member-ams-org
|
