book answer is -.134 They use u=1-x^2 But what is wrong with what I did?
Follow Math Help Forum on Facebook and Google+
Is this the actual problem?
Originally Posted by Plato Is this the actual problem? What is the difference? Aren't they the same.
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.)
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?
Originally Posted by minneola24 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? You can do this without that blasted u-substitution What is the derivative of
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?
Anyone have an idea? Thanks
Originally Posted by minneola24 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? You need to put the whole integrand in terms of u. So (avoiding the question of the limits) You can't call u when you do the u integral. -Dan
View Tag Cloud