Metal Integral

Поділитися
Вставка
  • Опубліковано 8 вер 2024
  • In this video, I calculate the integral from 0 to n of x/2sqrt(x^2+4) + n+2/2n using trig substitution. The result is called the metallic ratio, where the case n = 1 leads to a number you probably all know :) Enjoy!
    Note: This problem can also be done using a regular substitution, but trig substitution is cooler 😎

КОМЕНТАРІ • 77

  • @gogo-pj2lm
    @gogo-pj2lm 5 років тому +33

    Trisub seems to be an overkill... Btw thx for ur effort in producing math vid

  • @mitchkovacs1396
    @mitchkovacs1396 5 років тому +56

    Maybe I missed something, but could we just do u-sub with u=x^2+4 and then the integral just follows the power rule?

    • @hOREP245
      @hOREP245 5 років тому

      He does say this in the description!
      Here is a quick proof writeup www.overleaf.com/read/rwkchcdxnksx if anyone is interested, but it's not very hard.

    • @sylvainm-v7919
      @sylvainm-v7919 5 років тому +1

      Ye

    • @helloitsme7553
      @helloitsme7553 5 років тому +2

      Did this too, way easier

    • @drpeyam
      @drpeyam  5 років тому +53

      Yeah, but the method in this video is more metal 😎

    • @amirb715
      @amirb715 5 років тому +2

      not even that, just let u=\sqrt{x^2+4}

  • @erikdurfey5576
    @erikdurfey5576 5 років тому +1

    I most certainly enjoyed this little trig integral calculus metal excursion! The DR ROCKS the house!

  • @afifakimih8823
    @afifakimih8823 5 років тому +2

    The Integral is actually beautiful..
    Golden,Silver and Bronze Ratio....thats all together Metalic Ratio...COOL!!

  • @neilgerace355
    @neilgerace355 5 років тому +6

    1, 2, 3, 5, 8 and 13 are all Fibonacci numbers ...

  • @allandela59
    @allandela59 5 років тому +1

    I enjoy watching your videos, each time it's a pleasure

  • @filippodifranco8225
    @filippodifranco8225 5 років тому +3

    Awesome. I won't claim x^2+4 sub is easier since it was already done. Instead, because I don't like Metallica, I'll wait for the Iron ratio. Up the Irons!

    • @dlevi67
      @dlevi67 4 роки тому

      13+sqrt(170)?

  • @ronaldpong3271
    @ronaldpong3271 5 років тому

    The "metallic" result is very cool. I do get the same result with a u-sub. Thanx for producing the video.

  • @sagarmajumder7806
    @sagarmajumder7806 2 роки тому

    This made my day metallic..
    I also see your plastic ratio video really coooooooolllllll things are to do..
    Thanks sir🙏🙏🙏🙏

  • @rik69x03
    @rik69x03 5 років тому +3

    Who else thinks that Dr. Pi(m) should deserve more subs?

  • @fNktn
    @fNktn 5 років тому +1

    One of my friends works at our state library and for my birthday this year he got me a series of math exercise books from 1917. One of the problems is the following integral: integrate (tan(x)*log(cot(x))) from 0 to pi/4;
    This turned out to be way harder than I thought and i'd really like to see you solve it :D

    • @hOREP245
      @hOREP245 5 років тому +1

      It would probably help if that integral actually converged, as wolfram alpha really doesn't think it does.
      www.wolframalpha.com/input/?i=integrate+(tan(x)*ln(cot(x)))+from+0+to+pi%2F2

    • @fNktn
      @fNktn 5 років тому

      @@hOREP245 whoops my bad, it's from 0 to pi/4

    • @calcul8er205
      @calcul8er205 5 років тому

      fNktn Sub t=tanx then use geometric expansion of 1/(1+t^2)

  • @wankar0388
    @wankar0388 5 років тому +1

    Gracias Dr Tigre Peyan, saludos desde Bolivia en su aniversario !!!!

  • @helloitsme7553
    @helloitsme7553 5 років тому +11

    Anyone else solved this in their head?

  • @dhunt6618
    @dhunt6618 5 років тому

    Thanks for the heavy metal(s) video! Pure gold!

  • @VibingMath
    @VibingMath 5 років тому

    Wow! Originally I think metallic ratio is somewhat related to metallic bond but at the end it is related to the three cool ratios, thank you Dr Peyam!

  • @jkid1134
    @jkid1134 5 років тому +5

    Integral is different in the video and thumbnail by a factor of 2 :)

  • @darius863
    @darius863 5 років тому +1

    AMAZING! 🤘🏻😄🤘🏻

  • @user-ed1tg9rj1e
    @user-ed1tg9rj1e 5 років тому

    I didn't expect this would be interesting until I heard silver ratio! lol

  • @Arup497
    @Arup497 5 років тому

    keep making interesting videos on mathematics

  • @mathman2302
    @mathman2302 5 років тому +7

    What books do you recommend to learn advanced math?.
    Awesome video :D

    • @DouglasHPlumb
      @DouglasHPlumb 5 років тому +1

      All basic textbooks in calculus are good. The favoured one is by Stewart.

    • @GanstaCatCT
      @GanstaCatCT 5 років тому +4

      It depends what you already know. It's really important to know basic stuff about sets and related notation, as well as functions. You should learn about logic and different types of statements, e.g. contrapositive, existential and universal statements. This includes different techniques of proof, such as induction and contradiction. Working knowledge of these concepts aids while writing and reading proofs, which is incredibly common in math as you go further on. All of these things, I would consider core to studying 'advanced math.' So if you haven't studied them yet, you should start there. Thankfully, there are lots of books on these topics, some free and accessible online-you could probably find lots of suggestions on reddit or other websites. Popular book suggestions for these topics are Velleman's "How to Prove It" and Hammock's "Book of Proof." There are other books that would likely serve you just as well, though those are nice from what I've read of them.
      After you have these preliminaries, there are multiple routes you could take: My advice would be to pick one thing and do it well. It is easy, in my experience, to overextend oneself while trying to learn lots of new information. And sometimes that's fun; it can also result in feeling lost, and if you don't have someone more experienced to help you along, it can be tough. Calculus may already be partially familiar, so it might make sense to start there. An 'advanced calculus' book would likely expose you to more rigorous math while still drawing on what's somewhat familiar, which is nice. Sometimes (not always!) rigor can obscure why something is true, so having the existing motivation is helpful. If you wanted to take a different route and study, say, abstract algebra, lots or all of the stuff could seem unfamiliar-that's fine too, it's just a different adventure at first. If you end up studying calculus/analysis, there'll be lots of people recommending a book by Rudin (Principles of Mathematical Analysis). This is a fine book, but it's pretty intense, and there are many other analysis books to choose from that might be more illuminating to start off.

    • @shawnmcadam8683
      @shawnmcadam8683 5 років тому +3

      Books I'm enjoying (but admittedly very slowly) are Sheldon Axler's Linear Algebra Done Right and Steven Abott's Understanding Analysis. If you try these books get ready to spend at least an hour per page.

    • @juniormontalvan4062
      @juniormontalvan4062 5 років тому

      I recommend you books from Tom Apostol and Piskunov, they could be complicated at first time because the Calculus' theory. But also they're very interesting;)

  • @Archipelago.
    @Archipelago. 5 років тому +3

    Don't know why
    🤘 I understood this one properly ☺️😋

  • @alvinlepik5265
    @alvinlepik5265 5 років тому +1

    Somewhat exotic to see (co)secants used. Never needed them, myself, plus they're kind of weird. sine and cosine are 'nice', but their reciprocals are not.

  • @vukstojiljkovic7181
    @vukstojiljkovic7181 5 років тому

    this is so cool!!!

  • @AliAhmad-dv1gn
    @AliAhmad-dv1gn 5 років тому

    You can easily do it and you don't have to use substitution method
    Integral x/(2sqrt(x^2+4)) = sqrt(x^2+4)/2
    Because the d(sqrt(x^2+4))/dx=
    x/(sqrt(x^2+4)).

  • @marstruth1578
    @marstruth1578 5 років тому

    Power rule & chain rule effortlessly

  • @maxsch.6555
    @maxsch.6555 5 років тому

    Cool :)

  • @SimoCr
    @SimoCr 5 років тому

    Amazing videos as always!! Side note: What source would you suggest for learning lie algebra? Thanks a lot

  • @nevokrien95
    @nevokrien95 5 років тому

    Its easier to subsitute sinh because 1 + sinh^2=cosh^2

  • @Handelsbilanzdefizit
    @Handelsbilanzdefizit 5 років тому +1

    And now the stone- and wood-integral ^^

    • @drpeyam
      @drpeyam  5 років тому

      Hahaha

    • @Handelsbilanzdefizit
      @Handelsbilanzdefizit 5 років тому +1

      @@drpeyam
      ln(x)+ln(x-1)=0 --> x = golden ratio
      ln(x)+ln(x-2)=0 --> x = silver ratio
      ln(x)+ln(x-3)=0 --> x = bronze ratio
      ...
      So: phi_n = n+1/(n+1/(n+1/(...)))

  • @bahadirtuncay192
    @bahadirtuncay192 5 років тому

    I've noticed something neat with the metallic ratio and the series a(n) = n^2 + 1 (oeis.org/A002522).
    When you calculate Phi(n) when n is even, you get this :
    Phi(2) = 1 + sqrt(2)
    Phi(4) = 2 + sqrt(5)
    Phi(6) = 3 + sqrt(10)
    Phi(8) = 4 + sqrt(17)
    Phi(10) = 5 + sqrt(26)
    Phi(12) = 6 + sqrt(37)
    And so on...
    Then when you look at the series "a(n) = n^2 + 1" and let a(n) be the number before the + sign, you get the number inside the square root.
    I wonder if there exists an equivalent relation to a series when Phi(n) is odd ?

  • @usuyus
    @usuyus 5 років тому

    Cool fact: if you plot y = (n+√(n^2+4)) / 2 as a function of n, as n gets bigger and bigger, the graph asymptotically approaches y = n
    Desmos link: www.desmos.com/calculator/ux7q1cjqur

  • @snejpu2508
    @snejpu2508 5 років тому

    If you talk on metal, do not forget to mention plastic by the way. : )

  • @georgesanxionnat5054
    @georgesanxionnat5054 5 років тому

    Hi @Dr Peyam! I wanted to know if it was possible to decompose the exponential function into a Fourier serie in the real world (cause otherwise I know tha exp(ix) =cos(x) +i sin(x)

    • @georgesanxionnat5054
      @georgesanxionnat5054 5 років тому

      Wait maybe I didn't understand a thing about fourrier series

  • @ricardoguzman5014
    @ricardoguzman5014 5 років тому +1

    The silver ratio is interesting because (√2 +1)^n as n→∞ approaches an integer.

  • @Czeckie
    @Czeckie 5 років тому

    i know metallic ratios defined analogously to the golden ratio, as a proportion of special rectangles. Is this integral just a coincidence, or is there some significance to it?

  • @JLConawayII
    @JLConawayII 5 років тому

    That integral screams for a u substitution. Dr. Peyam is unphased and uses trig substitution instead.

    • @drpeyam
      @drpeyam  5 років тому +1

      It screamed trig sub for me!

  • @tgx3529
    @tgx3529 4 роки тому

    The substitucion tg is useless. We can use the substitution k= sqrt(sqr x+4)

  • @googleuser3481
    @googleuser3481 5 років тому

    Miss'd the "2s" in the Denominator in the Thumb-nail, Sir.
    Use of parenthesis, will make it mathematicaly fair ;-)

  • @ssdd9911
    @ssdd9911 5 років тому

    triggggg

  • @mathranger3586
    @mathranger3586 5 років тому

    What about diamond ratio? ..

  • @LemoUtan
    @LemoUtan 5 років тому

    Presumably the Platinum Ratio is 1?

    • @LemoUtan
      @LemoUtan 5 років тому

      Oh, and definitely screaming u=x^2+4 sub, what with the du already on top.

  • @rogerkearns8094
    @rogerkearns8094 5 років тому +2

    _Bronze ratio_
    Alloy there!

    • @weinihao3632
      @weinihao3632 5 років тому +1

      That confused me, too. And what follows after Bronze (e.g. N=4)?

    • @rogerkearns8094
      @rogerkearns8094 5 років тому

      @@weinihao3632
      Well, the atomic number of beryllium is 4, but they can't really name them that way - especially as atomic numbers 1 and 2 - hydrogen and helium - aren't normally metals.
      Group 11 of the periodic table might suggest that, after gold and silver, copper should be next (I actually expected that).
      Perhaps the numbering might better have been called coinage or medal numbers.
      Cheers :)

  • @shiina_mahiru_9067
    @shiina_mahiru_9067 5 років тому

    How about metallic ration with N being negative

    • @dlevi67
      @dlevi67 4 роки тому

      Then you get the unobtainium, adamantium and mithril ratios.

  • @Blitzkugel100
    @Blitzkugel100 5 років тому

    Was expecting some nice cheeky graph that looked like Metallica, got baited by Thumbnail, was disappointed.

  • @almightyhydra
    @almightyhydra 5 років тому

    Why are US pronounciations of greek letters so triggering? Theta rhymes with "metre" and phi rhymes with "why". After all, you don't call 3.1415... "pee", right?

    • @berenjervin
      @berenjervin 5 років тому

      The US went to the moon with those pronunciations. It works, even if they printed everything upside down and read it backwards. :)

  • @TheNachoesuncapo
    @TheNachoesuncapo 5 років тому +1

    But,do you actually like Metallica?

    • @drpeyam
      @drpeyam  5 років тому

      I don’t really listen to them

  • @willnewman9783
    @willnewman9783 5 років тому

    Dont do another video about properties of metalic ratios. There are already enough of those on UA-cam

    • @drpeyam
      @drpeyam  5 років тому

      Oops!

    • @willnewman9783
      @willnewman9783 5 років тому

      @@drpeyam this video was quite different, but there are a lot of videos with typical properties of the metalic ratios, so I urge against making one, unless you can make the video about different things

    • @drpeyam
      @drpeyam  5 років тому

      Haha, I already prerecorded one 😅 Let’s see how it goes