Leibniz's notation and how suggestive it is

  • Thread starter Werg22
  • Start date
  • Tags
    Notation
In summary, the method of substitution in integrals and the use of Leibniz's notation is justified by the chain rule and the fundamental theorem of calculus. The substitution rule is simply the integral version of the chain rule and the 'integration by parts'-rule is the integral version of the product rule. The validity of these rules can be proven using the chain rule and the fundamental theorem of calculus.
  • #1
Werg22
1,431
1
With the method of substitution with integrals, Leibniz's notation comes in handy has it shows us usefull transformation with simple manipulation. However, I'm asking myself what is the proof behind all that? For substituion, wouldn't have to use the definition of integral and use limits?
 
Physics news on Phys.org
  • #2
All valid notational 'abuse' is justified by the chain rule. Rather sloppily: [tex]\frac{dy}{dx}=\frac{dy}{du}\frac{du}{dx}[/tex]
That is to say. You can prove the validity of the substitution rule in integrals and separation of variables in ODE's with the chain rule.
 
  • #3
To phrase it another way, while the derivative is not a fraction, it is a limit of a fraction. We can always go back before the limit, make use of the fraction properties and then take the limit to show that derivatives has the properties of fractions. Leibniz notation, and especially, the definition of "differentials", [itex]dy= \left(\frac{dy}{dx}\right)dx[/itex], is a way of making use of that fact.
 
  • #4
I understand that it is mearly an expression of fractions, and with derivatives the conclusions are obvious... however I fail to see that they make everything obvious for integrals, for there is no proof shown that the Riemann Sum in question will converge to the same result we find by manipulating dy and dx...
 
  • #5
Yes there is since it is just the chain rule.
 
  • #6
Werg22 said:
and with derivatives the conclusions are obvious... however I fail to see that they make everything obvious for integrals, for
Since integration is the 'reverse' of differentiation, everything that is obvious for differentiation has a mathematically trivial counterresult for integration. The substitution rule is just the integral version of the chain rule and the 'integration by parts'-rule is just the integral version of the product rule.

Why don't you try to prove the rule yourself? I`ll state it here:

If g' is continuous on [a,b] and f is continuous on the range of u=g(x), then:

[tex]\int_a^bf(g(x))g'(x)dx=\int_{g(a)}^{g(b)}f(u)du[/tex]

Start by assuming F be an antiderivative of f. Note that F(g(x)) is an antiderivative of f(g(x))g'(x) by the chain rule.
You can fill in the rest.
 
  • #7
Werg22 said:
I understand that it is mearly an expression of fractions, and with derivatives the conclusions are obvious... however I fail to see that they make everything obvious for integrals, for there is no proof shown that the Riemann Sum in question will converge to the same result we find by manipulating dy and dx...

You're forgetting the essential link between integration and differentiation provided by the FTC. There's a reason we call the theorem "fundamental!"
 

Related to Leibniz's notation and how suggestive it is

1. What is Leibniz's notation and how is it used in mathematics?

Leibniz's notation is a system of symbols used in calculus to represent mathematical concepts such as derivatives and integrals. It was developed by the mathematician and philosopher Gottfried Wilhelm Leibniz in the 17th century. This notation is still widely used in modern mathematics to simplify and generalize complex equations.

2. How does Leibniz's notation differ from other mathematical notations?

Unlike other notations, such as Newton's notation, Leibniz's notation uses symbols that resemble letters from the alphabet, making it more intuitive and easier to understand. It also allows for a more compact and flexible representation of mathematical concepts, making it popular among mathematicians.

3. What makes Leibniz's notation so suggestive in solving mathematical problems?

Leibniz's notation is considered suggestive because it allows for a more natural and intuitive representation of mathematical operations. The use of symbols like dx and dy in derivatives, for example, suggests the infinitesimal change in x and y, making it easier to visualize and understand the concept.

4. How has Leibniz's notation influenced modern mathematics?

Leibniz's notation has had a significant impact on modern mathematics, particularly in the field of calculus. Its intuitive and flexible nature has allowed for the development of more complex equations and theorems, making it an essential tool for mathematicians and scientists in various disciplines.

5. Is Leibniz's notation still relevant in today's mathematics?

Absolutely. Leibniz's notation is still widely used in mathematics, particularly in calculus and its applications. It continues to be taught in schools and universities as an essential tool for understanding and solving mathematical problems. Its influence can also be seen in other fields, such as physics and engineering.

Similar threads

Replies
6
Views
2K
  • Calculus
Replies
13
Views
3K
Replies
1
Views
1K
  • Set Theory, Logic, Probability, Statistics
Replies
6
Views
1K
Replies
10
Views
4K
  • Calculus
Replies
2
Views
1K
  • Calculus
Replies
7
Views
4K
Replies
9
Views
3K
Replies
1
Views
1K
Replies
11
Views
1K
Back
Top