In the most recent tutorial there is a question about converting a Riemann sum to a definite integral, and it seems to be tripping up quite a few students. I wanted to run through one of the calculations in detail so you can see how to answer such a question.
Let’s look at the example:
\[\lim_{n\rightarrow\infty}\sum_{i=1}^n\left(9\left(4+(i-1)\frac{6}{n}\right)^2-8\left(4+(i-1)\frac{6}{n}\right)+7\right)\frac{13}{n}\]
There are many ways to tackle such a question but let’s take one particular path. Let’s start by the fact that when the limit is defined, the limit of a sum is the sum of the limits. We can split up our expression into 3, which looks like:
\[\lim_{n\rightarrow\infty}\sum_{i=1}^n9\left(4+(i-1)\frac{6}{n}\right)^2\frac{13}{n}-\lim_{n\rightarrow\infty}\sum_{i=1}^n\left(8\left(4+(i-1)\frac{6}{n}\right)\right)\frac{13}{n}+\lim_{n\rightarrow\infty}\sum_{i=1}^n7\frac{13}{n}\]
Let’s tackle each of these separately. Let’s look at the first term:
\[\lim_{n\rightarrow\infty}\sum_{i=1}^n9\left(4+(i-1)\frac{6}{n}\right)^2\frac{13}{n}\]
Well, we can take the factor of 13 outside the front of the whole thing to start with, along with the factor of 9, and this will give
\[13\times 9\lim_{n\rightarrow\infty}\sum_{i=1}^n\left(4+(i-1)\frac{6}{n}\right)^2\frac{1}{n}\]
We see here that we have a sum of terms, and a factor which looks like \(\frac{1}{n}\) in each term. We notice however that inside the bracket there is a \(\frac{6}{n}\), so we try to make the term on the outside look the same as this. Multiply and divide by 6 to give:
\[13\times 9\times\frac{1}{6}\lim_{n\rightarrow\infty}\sum_{i=1}^n\left(4+(i-1)\frac{6}{n}\right)^2\frac{6}{n}\]
Now, the \(\frac{6}{n}\) is a constant (as we sum over the i’s), and will correspond to the width of the rectangles in the area which is ultimately what a Riemann sum tells us about. Remember in a Riemann sum, we want a function value at a particular point, times a width. We will call the width of each rectangle \(\Delta x=\frac{6}{n}\). So we can write:
\[\frac{117}{6}\lim_{n\rightarrow\infty}\sum_{i=1}^n\left(4+(i-1)\frac{6}{n}\right)^2\Delta x\]
Now, in a Riemann sum, we have a function evaluated at various points, which we generally call \(x_i\). As we increase i by 1, we move to the next rectangle in our approximation. Here we see a factor of \((i-1)\frac{6}{n}\) (pulling out the factor of 6). Remembering that \(\frac{1}{n}\) is the width of our rectangles, when i=1, this is going to give the point 0, and when i=n, this is going to give the point \((n-1)\frac{6}{n}\). That’s not very interesting, but if we were to go to the next point (i=n+1), we would have \(n\frac{6}{n}\) which would be the point 6. So, running through the values from i=1 to i=n, the quantity \((i-1)\frac{6}{n}\) goes from the value 0 to the value just below 6, where as we take n to infinity, we get closer and closer to 6 for that last point. We can treat \((i-1)\frac{6}{n}\) as our \(x_{i-1}\), so long as we know that we are going from \(x_0=0\) to \(x_{n-1}=\frac{6(n-1)}{n}\). So, we can write:
\[\frac{117}{6}\lim_{n\rightarrow\infty}\sum_{i=1}^n\left(4+x_{i-1}\right)^2\Delta x\]
with \(x_0=0\) to \(x_{n-1}=\frac{6(n-1)}{n}\)
This can be converted directly into the definite integral:
\[\frac{117}{6}\int_0^6\left(4+x\right)^2dx\]
Exactly the same procedure works with the other expressions in the sum, and we end up with:
\[\lim_{n\rightarrow\infty}\sum_{i=1}^n\left(9\left(4+(i-1)\frac{6}{n}\right)^2-8\left(4+(i-1)\frac{6}{n}\right)+7\right)\frac{13}{n}\]
\[\frac{117}{6}\int_0^6\left(4+x\right)^2dx-\frac{104}{6}\int_0^6(4+x)dx+91\int_0^1 dx\]
where the 117 comes from 13 x 9, the 104 comes from 13 x 8 and the 91 comes from 13 x 7.
The last integral we can write as:
\[91\int_0^1 dx=\frac{91}{6}\int_0^6 dx\]
(Make sure that you can see that this is true).
And so we can actually write the whole thing as a single integral:
\[\frac{1}{6}\int_0^6117\left(4+x\right)^2-104(4+x)+91 dx\]
Which can be calculated from the known antiderivatives and the fundamental theorem of calculus part 2.
indeed is very impoortant the questions
i wish you actually showed how you changed the terminals of integration rather than just telling us we should see that it’s true.
@Liettew Claire, have you tried it? Give it a go. I leave it like that because it is something that you can explore, and find for yourself. If it still doesn’t make sense, I am happy to lead you through it.
i had to draw boxes to understand this but i dont get how it works generally for non constant integrands
Let’s take the integral of the function f(x)=x from x=0 to x=6. If you wanted to change it to an integral from 0 to 1 you would want to define a new variable, related to x, which, when x was 6, was equal to 1 and when x was 0 was equal to zero. So, this new variable could be, for instance p=x/6. Then x=6p. We can change variables now to p. the function we are integrating over becomes simply 6p, and dx becomes 6 dp. So now we have the integral over (6p 6 dp) from p=0 to p=1. This is 36 times the integral over p dp from p=0 to p=1. Which is 36 times p^2/2 from p=0 to p=1, which is 36 times 1^2/2 which is 36. Now check that indeed this is the same as the original x integral.
Does that make sense? Try it for the integral over x^2dx.
yes it makes sense. not sure how this principle works for constant integrands though, how does it work if f(x) = 2 and i want F(x) over the interval [0,3]?
can i even do a substitution in this case ?
Absolutely…Give it a go and see…check that the final answer is the same, whatever substitution you make, so long as you make the substitution in the variable, and in the limits