Friday, September 28, 2018

integration - How is it that treating Leibniz notation as a fraction is fundamentally incorrect but at the same time useful?

I have long struggled with the idea of Leibniz notation and the way it is used, especially in integration.



These threads discuss why treating Leibniz notation as a fraction and cancelling differentials is incorrect, but also go on to say that the notation is suggestive and we use it because it simplifies things:



What is the practical difference between a differential and a derivative?



If dy/dt * dt doesn't cancel, then what do you call it?




In them they say to treat the differential at the end of an integration expression as a "right parenthesis". This throws me off a bit because we can so easily do something like:



$\int cos(3x) \, dx$



$u=3x$



$du=3dx$



$\frac{1}{3}du=dx$




and then proceed to integrate:



$\frac{1}{3}\int cos(u) \, du$



and arrive at the correct answer with "incorrect" notation. I am supposed to treat the differential as a parenthesis but using this notation the differential seems to have a value.



How does this incorrect notation do such a good job ensuring that we do not disobey the "reverse chain rule" and ensures that our integrand is in the form $f'(g(x))\,g'(x)$ ?



People often say that it is very suggestive and I am wondering how. Excuse the LaTeX if it looks weird. This is my first time using it.

No comments:

Post a Comment

analysis - Injection, making bijection

I have injection $f \colon A \rightarrow B$ and I want to get bijection. Can I just resting codomain to $f(A)$? I know that every function i...