P.S. How do you make the infinity symbol on this site? (I've been looking around for help on the MATH code but found nothing, and I've just been reverse-engineering the code based on quotes from other posters.)
I'm having trouble solving:
even though I have the answer. It is getting from step to step that is hard.
Step 2 is:
Step 3 is:
I can't really figure out where they got their antiderivatives, which is what I thought was supposed to go right before the vertical bar in the step right after the one that includes the integration symbol. The coefficients on what I'm supposed to integrate were 2/3 and the coefficients on (what I think are) the anti-derivatives are -2. (I thought the antiderivative of e to a power was e to the same power. I think this stuff is going to continue to be really difficult until someone directly addresses this question.)
I think that going from step 2 to step 3 means that:
but I can't figure out why that is the case. Is really the antiderivative of ? Or is something else going on there?
The solution to the problem (step 4) is . Getting from step 3 to that is easy.
Okay, pondering hasn't helped. I can't figure out why you chose to multiply by 3/3 instead of 14/14 or something. Would your solution be different if e were a different number? Is your solution an example of U substitution?
Whether or not it is, does anyone know a place on the web that explains U substitution really simply, in as many steps as necessary? My book on the subject is literally an idiot's guide ... it blathers cheerfully about how you should "use your u and du expressions to replace parts of the original integral" which is little help.
I'm looking for something which will always define what u and du are in the specific example, as well as something that will explain if and when du is an actual factor to be multiplied, and when it just sits there on the end of the integration expression the way dx does (AFAIK, you don't multiply any dxs before, during, or after integrating ... the Hacker's tutorial seemed to back me up on this).
You can easily check this rule by differentiating and getting back .
In the question causing you to go prematurely grey, note that k = -3 ......
Warning: cannot be done using this rule because it does not have the correct form. It has to be done using integration by parts.
This is not a criticism: I think your prospects for understanding how to do are bleak if you are struggling to understand how to do .
This forum will only help you get so far ...... You really need to be getting as much one-on-one help as possible from your instructor.