Does this prove that $y=1over x$ has no midpoint?
Clash Royale CLAN TAG#URR8PPP
up vote
0
down vote
favorite
I was looking at the area under $y=1over x$, and randomly I wondered if there was some point at which the areas on either side were equal.
I set about finding the answer using this method:
$$\
lim_ato0^+ int_a^pdxover x=lim_btoinfty int_p^bdxover x\
lim_ato0^+ln p - ln a=lim_btoinftyln b - ln p\
2ln p=lim_ato0^+ln a+lim_btoinfty ln b\
2ln p = -infty+infty\
$$
Upon seeing the last line, I concluded that given the indeterminate form, $pin(0,infty)$, which I interpreted to mean "$p$ does not exist"
Is this rigorous enough, or did I skip some steps?
limits proof-verification improper-integrals
add a comment |Â
up vote
0
down vote
favorite
I was looking at the area under $y=1over x$, and randomly I wondered if there was some point at which the areas on either side were equal.
I set about finding the answer using this method:
$$\
lim_ato0^+ int_a^pdxover x=lim_btoinfty int_p^bdxover x\
lim_ato0^+ln p - ln a=lim_btoinftyln b - ln p\
2ln p=lim_ato0^+ln a+lim_btoinfty ln b\
2ln p = -infty+infty\
$$
Upon seeing the last line, I concluded that given the indeterminate form, $pin(0,infty)$, which I interpreted to mean "$p$ does not exist"
Is this rigorous enough, or did I skip some steps?
limits proof-verification improper-integrals
"On either side" of what? Depending on what you mean by "area," an answer like $x=pm 1$ might be acceptable.
â Randall
Aug 27 at 15:20
Well both of your initial integrals diverge, i.e. have infinite area under them, for any p. Since both integrals are not really defined you may want to try this with a different function so that both integrals converge
â Sheel Stueber
Aug 27 at 15:20
1
since the improper integrals are not convergentï¼ how you define the âÂÂareaâÂÂï¼Â
â mengdie1982
Aug 27 at 15:21
add a comment |Â
up vote
0
down vote
favorite
up vote
0
down vote
favorite
I was looking at the area under $y=1over x$, and randomly I wondered if there was some point at which the areas on either side were equal.
I set about finding the answer using this method:
$$\
lim_ato0^+ int_a^pdxover x=lim_btoinfty int_p^bdxover x\
lim_ato0^+ln p - ln a=lim_btoinftyln b - ln p\
2ln p=lim_ato0^+ln a+lim_btoinfty ln b\
2ln p = -infty+infty\
$$
Upon seeing the last line, I concluded that given the indeterminate form, $pin(0,infty)$, which I interpreted to mean "$p$ does not exist"
Is this rigorous enough, or did I skip some steps?
limits proof-verification improper-integrals
I was looking at the area under $y=1over x$, and randomly I wondered if there was some point at which the areas on either side were equal.
I set about finding the answer using this method:
$$\
lim_ato0^+ int_a^pdxover x=lim_btoinfty int_p^bdxover x\
lim_ato0^+ln p - ln a=lim_btoinftyln b - ln p\
2ln p=lim_ato0^+ln a+lim_btoinfty ln b\
2ln p = -infty+infty\
$$
Upon seeing the last line, I concluded that given the indeterminate form, $pin(0,infty)$, which I interpreted to mean "$p$ does not exist"
Is this rigorous enough, or did I skip some steps?
limits proof-verification improper-integrals
asked Aug 27 at 15:15
user189728
33729
33729
"On either side" of what? Depending on what you mean by "area," an answer like $x=pm 1$ might be acceptable.
â Randall
Aug 27 at 15:20
Well both of your initial integrals diverge, i.e. have infinite area under them, for any p. Since both integrals are not really defined you may want to try this with a different function so that both integrals converge
â Sheel Stueber
Aug 27 at 15:20
1
since the improper integrals are not convergentï¼ how you define the âÂÂareaâÂÂï¼Â
â mengdie1982
Aug 27 at 15:21
add a comment |Â
"On either side" of what? Depending on what you mean by "area," an answer like $x=pm 1$ might be acceptable.
â Randall
Aug 27 at 15:20
Well both of your initial integrals diverge, i.e. have infinite area under them, for any p. Since both integrals are not really defined you may want to try this with a different function so that both integrals converge
â Sheel Stueber
Aug 27 at 15:20
1
since the improper integrals are not convergentï¼ how you define the âÂÂareaâÂÂï¼Â
â mengdie1982
Aug 27 at 15:21
"On either side" of what? Depending on what you mean by "area," an answer like $x=pm 1$ might be acceptable.
â Randall
Aug 27 at 15:20
"On either side" of what? Depending on what you mean by "area," an answer like $x=pm 1$ might be acceptable.
â Randall
Aug 27 at 15:20
Well both of your initial integrals diverge, i.e. have infinite area under them, for any p. Since both integrals are not really defined you may want to try this with a different function so that both integrals converge
â Sheel Stueber
Aug 27 at 15:20
Well both of your initial integrals diverge, i.e. have infinite area under them, for any p. Since both integrals are not really defined you may want to try this with a different function so that both integrals converge
â Sheel Stueber
Aug 27 at 15:20
1
1
since the improper integrals are not convergentï¼ how you define the âÂÂareaâÂÂï¼Â
â mengdie1982
Aug 27 at 15:21
since the improper integrals are not convergentï¼ how you define the âÂÂareaâÂÂï¼Â
â mengdie1982
Aug 27 at 15:21
add a comment |Â
2 Answers
2
active
oldest
votes
up vote
2
down vote
accepted
We have that $lim_ato0^+ int_a^pdxover x$ diverges and $lim_btoinfty int_p^bdxover x$ diverges too. So, since these two areas tend to $infty$, you cannot compare those two. Hence you cannot find a point where these two areas are equal.
From the indeterminate that you found you cannot conclude the non-existence of $p$ cause an indeterminate form of $infty -infty$ with some manipulations can lead to a number or not.
add a comment |Â
up vote
1
down vote
Your statement that $p$ does not exist is correct.
You know that the total integral is $infty$ and you are looking for a point which divides infinity in two equal parts.
Now if the point $p$ is a real point,then the first half of the integral will be bounded and can not be infinity.
Thus even without integration we notice that such a point does not exist.
The same argument goes for every integral which diverges to infinity.
add a comment |Â
2 Answers
2
active
oldest
votes
2 Answers
2
active
oldest
votes
active
oldest
votes
active
oldest
votes
up vote
2
down vote
accepted
We have that $lim_ato0^+ int_a^pdxover x$ diverges and $lim_btoinfty int_p^bdxover x$ diverges too. So, since these two areas tend to $infty$, you cannot compare those two. Hence you cannot find a point where these two areas are equal.
From the indeterminate that you found you cannot conclude the non-existence of $p$ cause an indeterminate form of $infty -infty$ with some manipulations can lead to a number or not.
add a comment |Â
up vote
2
down vote
accepted
We have that $lim_ato0^+ int_a^pdxover x$ diverges and $lim_btoinfty int_p^bdxover x$ diverges too. So, since these two areas tend to $infty$, you cannot compare those two. Hence you cannot find a point where these two areas are equal.
From the indeterminate that you found you cannot conclude the non-existence of $p$ cause an indeterminate form of $infty -infty$ with some manipulations can lead to a number or not.
add a comment |Â
up vote
2
down vote
accepted
up vote
2
down vote
accepted
We have that $lim_ato0^+ int_a^pdxover x$ diverges and $lim_btoinfty int_p^bdxover x$ diverges too. So, since these two areas tend to $infty$, you cannot compare those two. Hence you cannot find a point where these two areas are equal.
From the indeterminate that you found you cannot conclude the non-existence of $p$ cause an indeterminate form of $infty -infty$ with some manipulations can lead to a number or not.
We have that $lim_ato0^+ int_a^pdxover x$ diverges and $lim_btoinfty int_p^bdxover x$ diverges too. So, since these two areas tend to $infty$, you cannot compare those two. Hence you cannot find a point where these two areas are equal.
From the indeterminate that you found you cannot conclude the non-existence of $p$ cause an indeterminate form of $infty -infty$ with some manipulations can lead to a number or not.
answered Aug 27 at 15:27
Anastassis Kapetanakis
58335
58335
add a comment |Â
add a comment |Â
up vote
1
down vote
Your statement that $p$ does not exist is correct.
You know that the total integral is $infty$ and you are looking for a point which divides infinity in two equal parts.
Now if the point $p$ is a real point,then the first half of the integral will be bounded and can not be infinity.
Thus even without integration we notice that such a point does not exist.
The same argument goes for every integral which diverges to infinity.
add a comment |Â
up vote
1
down vote
Your statement that $p$ does not exist is correct.
You know that the total integral is $infty$ and you are looking for a point which divides infinity in two equal parts.
Now if the point $p$ is a real point,then the first half of the integral will be bounded and can not be infinity.
Thus even without integration we notice that such a point does not exist.
The same argument goes for every integral which diverges to infinity.
add a comment |Â
up vote
1
down vote
up vote
1
down vote
Your statement that $p$ does not exist is correct.
You know that the total integral is $infty$ and you are looking for a point which divides infinity in two equal parts.
Now if the point $p$ is a real point,then the first half of the integral will be bounded and can not be infinity.
Thus even without integration we notice that such a point does not exist.
The same argument goes for every integral which diverges to infinity.
Your statement that $p$ does not exist is correct.
You know that the total integral is $infty$ and you are looking for a point which divides infinity in two equal parts.
Now if the point $p$ is a real point,then the first half of the integral will be bounded and can not be infinity.
Thus even without integration we notice that such a point does not exist.
The same argument goes for every integral which diverges to infinity.
answered Aug 27 at 15:33
Mohammad Riazi-Kermani
30.6k41852
30.6k41852
add a comment |Â
add a comment |Â
Sign up or log in
StackExchange.ready(function ()
StackExchange.helpers.onClickDraftSave('#login-link');
);
Sign up using Google
Sign up using Facebook
Sign up using Email and Password
Post as a guest
StackExchange.ready(
function ()
StackExchange.openid.initPostLogin('.new-post-login', 'https%3a%2f%2fmath.stackexchange.com%2fquestions%2f2896287%2fdoes-this-prove-that-y-1-over-x-has-no-midpoint%23new-answer', 'question_page');
);
Post as a guest
Sign up or log in
StackExchange.ready(function ()
StackExchange.helpers.onClickDraftSave('#login-link');
);
Sign up using Google
Sign up using Facebook
Sign up using Email and Password
Post as a guest
Sign up or log in
StackExchange.ready(function ()
StackExchange.helpers.onClickDraftSave('#login-link');
);
Sign up using Google
Sign up using Facebook
Sign up using Email and Password
Post as a guest
Sign up or log in
StackExchange.ready(function ()
StackExchange.helpers.onClickDraftSave('#login-link');
);
Sign up using Google
Sign up using Facebook
Sign up using Email and Password
Sign up using Google
Sign up using Facebook
Sign up using Email and Password
"On either side" of what? Depending on what you mean by "area," an answer like $x=pm 1$ might be acceptable.
â Randall
Aug 27 at 15:20
Well both of your initial integrals diverge, i.e. have infinite area under them, for any p. Since both integrals are not really defined you may want to try this with a different function so that both integrals converge
â Sheel Stueber
Aug 27 at 15:20
1
since the improper integrals are not convergentï¼ how you define the âÂÂareaâÂÂï¼Â
â mengdie1982
Aug 27 at 15:21