Attachment 28533book answer is -.134

They use u=1-x^2

But what is wrong with what I did?

Printable View

- Jun 5th 2013, 01:33 PMminneola24Integral arcsin
Attachment 28533book answer is -.134

They use u=1-x^2

But what is wrong with what I did? - Jun 5th 2013, 01:54 PMPlatoRe: Integral arcsin
Is this the actual problem?

- Jun 5th 2013, 01:57 PMminneola24Re: Integral arcsin
- Jun 5th 2013, 02:04 PMHallsofIvyRe: Integral arcsin
By taking , you wind up with NOT

(Plato wasn't saying there was a difference, he was asking you to verify what your problem is.) - Jun 5th 2013, 02:35 PMminneola24Re: Integral arcsin
Yes he wrote it correctly. The book uses u=1-x^2

I'm just confused because I did it a different way and got a different answer. What did I do wrong? - Jun 5th 2013, 02:46 PMPlatoRe: Integral arcsin
- Jun 5th 2013, 02:49 PMminneola24Re: Integral arcsin
I understand you can do it without the u sub I did, but if let's say this is all that came to your mind at the time what did I do wrong in my work?

- Jun 10th 2013, 03:41 PMminneola24Re: Integral arcsin
Anyone have an idea?

Thanks - Jun 10th 2013, 07:02 PMtopsquarkRe: Integral arcsin