How to find the derivative of a definite integral that has unusual lower and upper bounds?











up vote
-1
down vote

favorite












I'm not sure how to deal with upper and lower bounds in integrals when using the first part of the fundamental theorem of calculus to work with them.



The question I'm looking at asks me to find the derivative of the function, where the function is a definite integral. The question is explicitly telling me to use the fact that $frac{d}{dx} int f(x)dx = f(x)$, i.e. the first part of the fundamental theorem of calculus, to answer the question.



The function is:



$$int_{sqrt{x}}^{pi/4} theta cdot tantheta cdot dtheta = g(x)$$



In words: if a function corresponds to an integral where the upper bound on the integral is $pi/4$, the lower bound is $sqrt{x}$, and the function being integrated is $theta cdot tantheta$ with respect to $theta$, then what is the derivative of the function?



I've tried setting $u = pi/4$ and applying the chain rule, that's worked in the past but it doesn't give me the right answer here. I'm guessing I also have to incorporate the lower bound, that $sqrt{x}$, in my solution somehow, but I have no idea how.



Any help would be greatly appreciated.










share|cite|improve this question




















  • 3




    Hint: chain rule.
    – GEdgar
    Nov 24 at 22:34










  • As a suggested reading, check out Leibniz Rule for differentiation of integrals.
    – Shubham Johri
    Nov 24 at 22:44










  • Hint: $int_{-infty}^x f(x) dx = f(x)$, so $int_a^bf(x) dx = int_{-infty}^b f(x) dx - int_{-infty}^a f(x) dx$
    – eSurfsnake
    Nov 25 at 7:19

















up vote
-1
down vote

favorite












I'm not sure how to deal with upper and lower bounds in integrals when using the first part of the fundamental theorem of calculus to work with them.



The question I'm looking at asks me to find the derivative of the function, where the function is a definite integral. The question is explicitly telling me to use the fact that $frac{d}{dx} int f(x)dx = f(x)$, i.e. the first part of the fundamental theorem of calculus, to answer the question.



The function is:



$$int_{sqrt{x}}^{pi/4} theta cdot tantheta cdot dtheta = g(x)$$



In words: if a function corresponds to an integral where the upper bound on the integral is $pi/4$, the lower bound is $sqrt{x}$, and the function being integrated is $theta cdot tantheta$ with respect to $theta$, then what is the derivative of the function?



I've tried setting $u = pi/4$ and applying the chain rule, that's worked in the past but it doesn't give me the right answer here. I'm guessing I also have to incorporate the lower bound, that $sqrt{x}$, in my solution somehow, but I have no idea how.



Any help would be greatly appreciated.










share|cite|improve this question




















  • 3




    Hint: chain rule.
    – GEdgar
    Nov 24 at 22:34










  • As a suggested reading, check out Leibniz Rule for differentiation of integrals.
    – Shubham Johri
    Nov 24 at 22:44










  • Hint: $int_{-infty}^x f(x) dx = f(x)$, so $int_a^bf(x) dx = int_{-infty}^b f(x) dx - int_{-infty}^a f(x) dx$
    – eSurfsnake
    Nov 25 at 7:19















up vote
-1
down vote

favorite









up vote
-1
down vote

favorite











I'm not sure how to deal with upper and lower bounds in integrals when using the first part of the fundamental theorem of calculus to work with them.



The question I'm looking at asks me to find the derivative of the function, where the function is a definite integral. The question is explicitly telling me to use the fact that $frac{d}{dx} int f(x)dx = f(x)$, i.e. the first part of the fundamental theorem of calculus, to answer the question.



The function is:



$$int_{sqrt{x}}^{pi/4} theta cdot tantheta cdot dtheta = g(x)$$



In words: if a function corresponds to an integral where the upper bound on the integral is $pi/4$, the lower bound is $sqrt{x}$, and the function being integrated is $theta cdot tantheta$ with respect to $theta$, then what is the derivative of the function?



I've tried setting $u = pi/4$ and applying the chain rule, that's worked in the past but it doesn't give me the right answer here. I'm guessing I also have to incorporate the lower bound, that $sqrt{x}$, in my solution somehow, but I have no idea how.



Any help would be greatly appreciated.










share|cite|improve this question















I'm not sure how to deal with upper and lower bounds in integrals when using the first part of the fundamental theorem of calculus to work with them.



The question I'm looking at asks me to find the derivative of the function, where the function is a definite integral. The question is explicitly telling me to use the fact that $frac{d}{dx} int f(x)dx = f(x)$, i.e. the first part of the fundamental theorem of calculus, to answer the question.



The function is:



$$int_{sqrt{x}}^{pi/4} theta cdot tantheta cdot dtheta = g(x)$$



In words: if a function corresponds to an integral where the upper bound on the integral is $pi/4$, the lower bound is $sqrt{x}$, and the function being integrated is $theta cdot tantheta$ with respect to $theta$, then what is the derivative of the function?



I've tried setting $u = pi/4$ and applying the chain rule, that's worked in the past but it doesn't give me the right answer here. I'm guessing I also have to incorporate the lower bound, that $sqrt{x}$, in my solution somehow, but I have no idea how.



Any help would be greatly appreciated.







calculus integration definite-integrals






share|cite|improve this question















share|cite|improve this question













share|cite|improve this question




share|cite|improve this question








edited Nov 24 at 22:42









Eevee Trainer

2,169220




2,169220










asked Nov 24 at 22:30









James Ronald

485




485








  • 3




    Hint: chain rule.
    – GEdgar
    Nov 24 at 22:34










  • As a suggested reading, check out Leibniz Rule for differentiation of integrals.
    – Shubham Johri
    Nov 24 at 22:44










  • Hint: $int_{-infty}^x f(x) dx = f(x)$, so $int_a^bf(x) dx = int_{-infty}^b f(x) dx - int_{-infty}^a f(x) dx$
    – eSurfsnake
    Nov 25 at 7:19
















  • 3




    Hint: chain rule.
    – GEdgar
    Nov 24 at 22:34










  • As a suggested reading, check out Leibniz Rule for differentiation of integrals.
    – Shubham Johri
    Nov 24 at 22:44










  • Hint: $int_{-infty}^x f(x) dx = f(x)$, so $int_a^bf(x) dx = int_{-infty}^b f(x) dx - int_{-infty}^a f(x) dx$
    – eSurfsnake
    Nov 25 at 7:19










3




3




Hint: chain rule.
– GEdgar
Nov 24 at 22:34




Hint: chain rule.
– GEdgar
Nov 24 at 22:34












As a suggested reading, check out Leibniz Rule for differentiation of integrals.
– Shubham Johri
Nov 24 at 22:44




As a suggested reading, check out Leibniz Rule for differentiation of integrals.
– Shubham Johri
Nov 24 at 22:44












Hint: $int_{-infty}^x f(x) dx = f(x)$, so $int_a^bf(x) dx = int_{-infty}^b f(x) dx - int_{-infty}^a f(x) dx$
– eSurfsnake
Nov 25 at 7:19






Hint: $int_{-infty}^x f(x) dx = f(x)$, so $int_a^bf(x) dx = int_{-infty}^b f(x) dx - int_{-infty}^a f(x) dx$
– eSurfsnake
Nov 25 at 7:19












2 Answers
2






active

oldest

votes

















up vote
5
down vote













So,$$g(x)=int_{sqrt x}^{fracpi4}thetatantheta,mathrm dtheta=-int_{fracpi4}^{sqrt x}thetatantheta,mathrm dtheta.$$Can you now apply the Fundamental Theorem of Calculus, together with the chain rule?






share|cite|improve this answer





















  • Yes I can, thank you so much! That was a lot simpler than I thought. So does the lower bound not matter at all when applying the first part of the FTC?
    – James Ronald
    Nov 24 at 22:42










  • No, the lower bound does not matter.
    – José Carlos Santos
    Nov 24 at 22:45


















up vote
1
down vote













After years of tutoring Calculus I, it baffles me that professors somehow expect students to figure out how to extend part I of the Fundamental Theorem of Calculus to cases where the upper limit is not $x$ and the lower limit is not a constant.



So, I will provide you with a quick, intuitive (and not rigorous) derivation on how you should approach this.



Suppose the lower limit is $L(x)$ and the upper limit is $U(x)$ of the integral. Define



$$g(x) = int_{L(x)}^{U(x)}f(t)text{ d}ttext{.}$$



Suppose $F$ is an antiderivative of $f$. By part II of the Fundamental Theorem of Calculus, you know that
$$g(x) = int_{L(x)}^{U(x)}f(t)text{ d}t = F(U(x)) - F(L(x))text{.}$$
Then, the derivative of $g$ is given by, assuming differentiability of $U$ and $L$,



$$dfrac{text{d}}{text{d}x}[g(x)] = F^{prime}(U(x))U^{prime}(x)-F^{prime}(L(x))L^{prime}(x)$$
after making use of the chain rule for derivatives. But, $F$ is an antiderivative of $f$, so $F^{prime} = f$, hence
$$dfrac{text{d}}{text{d}x}[g(x)] = f(U(x))U^{prime}(x)-f(L(x))L^{prime}(x)text{.}$$
In other words, the main result is
$$boxed{ dfrac{text{d}}{text{d}x}int_{L(x)}^{U(x)}f(t)text{ d}t = f(U(x))U^{prime}(x)-f(L(x))L^{prime}(x)text{.}}$$





Applying to this problem, we have $f(theta) = theta tan(theta)$, $U(x) = dfrac{pi}{4}$, and $L(x) = sqrt{x}$. The derivatives are $U^{prime}(x) = 0$ and $L^{prime}(x) = dfrac{1}{2sqrt{x}}$. Hence, the derivative of $g$ is
$$g^{prime}(x) = f(U(x))U^{prime}(x)-f(L(x))L^{prime}(x) = fleft(dfrac{pi}{4}right)(0) - fleft(sqrt{x}right) cdot dfrac{1}{2sqrt{x}}$$
which simplifies to
$$g^{prime}(x) = - fleft(sqrt{x}right) cdot dfrac{1}{2sqrt{x}} = -sqrt{x}tan(sqrt{x}) cdot dfrac{1}{2sqrt{x}} = -dfrac{1}{2}tan(sqrt{x})text{.}$$






share|cite|improve this answer





















  • Wow, that really is a great intuition, thank you so much! You said it's not rigorous, but it seems be a completely valid proof, and as long as it's valid the simpler the better in my opinion haha. I wish I'd seen this earlier. Thanks again!
    – James Ronald
    Nov 24 at 23:11











Your Answer





StackExchange.ifUsing("editor", function () {
return StackExchange.using("mathjaxEditing", function () {
StackExchange.MarkdownEditor.creationCallbacks.add(function (editor, postfix) {
StackExchange.mathjaxEditing.prepareWmdForMathJax(editor, postfix, [["$", "$"], ["\\(","\\)"]]);
});
});
}, "mathjax-editing");

StackExchange.ready(function() {
var channelOptions = {
tags: "".split(" "),
id: "69"
};
initTagRenderer("".split(" "), "".split(" "), channelOptions);

StackExchange.using("externalEditor", function() {
// Have to fire editor after snippets, if snippets enabled
if (StackExchange.settings.snippets.snippetsEnabled) {
StackExchange.using("snippets", function() {
createEditor();
});
}
else {
createEditor();
}
});

function createEditor() {
StackExchange.prepareEditor({
heartbeatType: 'answer',
convertImagesToLinks: true,
noModals: true,
showLowRepImageUploadWarning: true,
reputationToPostImages: 10,
bindNavPrevention: true,
postfix: "",
imageUploader: {
brandingHtml: "Powered by u003ca class="icon-imgur-white" href="https://imgur.com/"u003eu003c/au003e",
contentPolicyHtml: "User contributions licensed under u003ca href="https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-sa/3.0/"u003ecc by-sa 3.0 with attribution requiredu003c/au003e u003ca href="https://stackoverflow.com/legal/content-policy"u003e(content policy)u003c/au003e",
allowUrls: true
},
noCode: true, onDemand: true,
discardSelector: ".discard-answer"
,immediatelyShowMarkdownHelp:true
});


}
});














draft saved

draft discarded


















StackExchange.ready(
function () {
StackExchange.openid.initPostLogin('.new-post-login', 'https%3a%2f%2fmath.stackexchange.com%2fquestions%2f3012182%2fhow-to-find-the-derivative-of-a-definite-integral-that-has-unusual-lower-and-upp%23new-answer', 'question_page');
}
);

Post as a guest















Required, but never shown

























2 Answers
2






active

oldest

votes








2 Answers
2






active

oldest

votes









active

oldest

votes






active

oldest

votes








up vote
5
down vote













So,$$g(x)=int_{sqrt x}^{fracpi4}thetatantheta,mathrm dtheta=-int_{fracpi4}^{sqrt x}thetatantheta,mathrm dtheta.$$Can you now apply the Fundamental Theorem of Calculus, together with the chain rule?






share|cite|improve this answer





















  • Yes I can, thank you so much! That was a lot simpler than I thought. So does the lower bound not matter at all when applying the first part of the FTC?
    – James Ronald
    Nov 24 at 22:42










  • No, the lower bound does not matter.
    – José Carlos Santos
    Nov 24 at 22:45















up vote
5
down vote













So,$$g(x)=int_{sqrt x}^{fracpi4}thetatantheta,mathrm dtheta=-int_{fracpi4}^{sqrt x}thetatantheta,mathrm dtheta.$$Can you now apply the Fundamental Theorem of Calculus, together with the chain rule?






share|cite|improve this answer





















  • Yes I can, thank you so much! That was a lot simpler than I thought. So does the lower bound not matter at all when applying the first part of the FTC?
    – James Ronald
    Nov 24 at 22:42










  • No, the lower bound does not matter.
    – José Carlos Santos
    Nov 24 at 22:45













up vote
5
down vote










up vote
5
down vote









So,$$g(x)=int_{sqrt x}^{fracpi4}thetatantheta,mathrm dtheta=-int_{fracpi4}^{sqrt x}thetatantheta,mathrm dtheta.$$Can you now apply the Fundamental Theorem of Calculus, together with the chain rule?






share|cite|improve this answer












So,$$g(x)=int_{sqrt x}^{fracpi4}thetatantheta,mathrm dtheta=-int_{fracpi4}^{sqrt x}thetatantheta,mathrm dtheta.$$Can you now apply the Fundamental Theorem of Calculus, together with the chain rule?







share|cite|improve this answer












share|cite|improve this answer



share|cite|improve this answer










answered Nov 24 at 22:34









José Carlos Santos

145k20114214




145k20114214












  • Yes I can, thank you so much! That was a lot simpler than I thought. So does the lower bound not matter at all when applying the first part of the FTC?
    – James Ronald
    Nov 24 at 22:42










  • No, the lower bound does not matter.
    – José Carlos Santos
    Nov 24 at 22:45


















  • Yes I can, thank you so much! That was a lot simpler than I thought. So does the lower bound not matter at all when applying the first part of the FTC?
    – James Ronald
    Nov 24 at 22:42










  • No, the lower bound does not matter.
    – José Carlos Santos
    Nov 24 at 22:45
















Yes I can, thank you so much! That was a lot simpler than I thought. So does the lower bound not matter at all when applying the first part of the FTC?
– James Ronald
Nov 24 at 22:42




Yes I can, thank you so much! That was a lot simpler than I thought. So does the lower bound not matter at all when applying the first part of the FTC?
– James Ronald
Nov 24 at 22:42












No, the lower bound does not matter.
– José Carlos Santos
Nov 24 at 22:45




No, the lower bound does not matter.
– José Carlos Santos
Nov 24 at 22:45










up vote
1
down vote













After years of tutoring Calculus I, it baffles me that professors somehow expect students to figure out how to extend part I of the Fundamental Theorem of Calculus to cases where the upper limit is not $x$ and the lower limit is not a constant.



So, I will provide you with a quick, intuitive (and not rigorous) derivation on how you should approach this.



Suppose the lower limit is $L(x)$ and the upper limit is $U(x)$ of the integral. Define



$$g(x) = int_{L(x)}^{U(x)}f(t)text{ d}ttext{.}$$



Suppose $F$ is an antiderivative of $f$. By part II of the Fundamental Theorem of Calculus, you know that
$$g(x) = int_{L(x)}^{U(x)}f(t)text{ d}t = F(U(x)) - F(L(x))text{.}$$
Then, the derivative of $g$ is given by, assuming differentiability of $U$ and $L$,



$$dfrac{text{d}}{text{d}x}[g(x)] = F^{prime}(U(x))U^{prime}(x)-F^{prime}(L(x))L^{prime}(x)$$
after making use of the chain rule for derivatives. But, $F$ is an antiderivative of $f$, so $F^{prime} = f$, hence
$$dfrac{text{d}}{text{d}x}[g(x)] = f(U(x))U^{prime}(x)-f(L(x))L^{prime}(x)text{.}$$
In other words, the main result is
$$boxed{ dfrac{text{d}}{text{d}x}int_{L(x)}^{U(x)}f(t)text{ d}t = f(U(x))U^{prime}(x)-f(L(x))L^{prime}(x)text{.}}$$





Applying to this problem, we have $f(theta) = theta tan(theta)$, $U(x) = dfrac{pi}{4}$, and $L(x) = sqrt{x}$. The derivatives are $U^{prime}(x) = 0$ and $L^{prime}(x) = dfrac{1}{2sqrt{x}}$. Hence, the derivative of $g$ is
$$g^{prime}(x) = f(U(x))U^{prime}(x)-f(L(x))L^{prime}(x) = fleft(dfrac{pi}{4}right)(0) - fleft(sqrt{x}right) cdot dfrac{1}{2sqrt{x}}$$
which simplifies to
$$g^{prime}(x) = - fleft(sqrt{x}right) cdot dfrac{1}{2sqrt{x}} = -sqrt{x}tan(sqrt{x}) cdot dfrac{1}{2sqrt{x}} = -dfrac{1}{2}tan(sqrt{x})text{.}$$






share|cite|improve this answer





















  • Wow, that really is a great intuition, thank you so much! You said it's not rigorous, but it seems be a completely valid proof, and as long as it's valid the simpler the better in my opinion haha. I wish I'd seen this earlier. Thanks again!
    – James Ronald
    Nov 24 at 23:11















up vote
1
down vote













After years of tutoring Calculus I, it baffles me that professors somehow expect students to figure out how to extend part I of the Fundamental Theorem of Calculus to cases where the upper limit is not $x$ and the lower limit is not a constant.



So, I will provide you with a quick, intuitive (and not rigorous) derivation on how you should approach this.



Suppose the lower limit is $L(x)$ and the upper limit is $U(x)$ of the integral. Define



$$g(x) = int_{L(x)}^{U(x)}f(t)text{ d}ttext{.}$$



Suppose $F$ is an antiderivative of $f$. By part II of the Fundamental Theorem of Calculus, you know that
$$g(x) = int_{L(x)}^{U(x)}f(t)text{ d}t = F(U(x)) - F(L(x))text{.}$$
Then, the derivative of $g$ is given by, assuming differentiability of $U$ and $L$,



$$dfrac{text{d}}{text{d}x}[g(x)] = F^{prime}(U(x))U^{prime}(x)-F^{prime}(L(x))L^{prime}(x)$$
after making use of the chain rule for derivatives. But, $F$ is an antiderivative of $f$, so $F^{prime} = f$, hence
$$dfrac{text{d}}{text{d}x}[g(x)] = f(U(x))U^{prime}(x)-f(L(x))L^{prime}(x)text{.}$$
In other words, the main result is
$$boxed{ dfrac{text{d}}{text{d}x}int_{L(x)}^{U(x)}f(t)text{ d}t = f(U(x))U^{prime}(x)-f(L(x))L^{prime}(x)text{.}}$$





Applying to this problem, we have $f(theta) = theta tan(theta)$, $U(x) = dfrac{pi}{4}$, and $L(x) = sqrt{x}$. The derivatives are $U^{prime}(x) = 0$ and $L^{prime}(x) = dfrac{1}{2sqrt{x}}$. Hence, the derivative of $g$ is
$$g^{prime}(x) = f(U(x))U^{prime}(x)-f(L(x))L^{prime}(x) = fleft(dfrac{pi}{4}right)(0) - fleft(sqrt{x}right) cdot dfrac{1}{2sqrt{x}}$$
which simplifies to
$$g^{prime}(x) = - fleft(sqrt{x}right) cdot dfrac{1}{2sqrt{x}} = -sqrt{x}tan(sqrt{x}) cdot dfrac{1}{2sqrt{x}} = -dfrac{1}{2}tan(sqrt{x})text{.}$$






share|cite|improve this answer





















  • Wow, that really is a great intuition, thank you so much! You said it's not rigorous, but it seems be a completely valid proof, and as long as it's valid the simpler the better in my opinion haha. I wish I'd seen this earlier. Thanks again!
    – James Ronald
    Nov 24 at 23:11













up vote
1
down vote










up vote
1
down vote









After years of tutoring Calculus I, it baffles me that professors somehow expect students to figure out how to extend part I of the Fundamental Theorem of Calculus to cases where the upper limit is not $x$ and the lower limit is not a constant.



So, I will provide you with a quick, intuitive (and not rigorous) derivation on how you should approach this.



Suppose the lower limit is $L(x)$ and the upper limit is $U(x)$ of the integral. Define



$$g(x) = int_{L(x)}^{U(x)}f(t)text{ d}ttext{.}$$



Suppose $F$ is an antiderivative of $f$. By part II of the Fundamental Theorem of Calculus, you know that
$$g(x) = int_{L(x)}^{U(x)}f(t)text{ d}t = F(U(x)) - F(L(x))text{.}$$
Then, the derivative of $g$ is given by, assuming differentiability of $U$ and $L$,



$$dfrac{text{d}}{text{d}x}[g(x)] = F^{prime}(U(x))U^{prime}(x)-F^{prime}(L(x))L^{prime}(x)$$
after making use of the chain rule for derivatives. But, $F$ is an antiderivative of $f$, so $F^{prime} = f$, hence
$$dfrac{text{d}}{text{d}x}[g(x)] = f(U(x))U^{prime}(x)-f(L(x))L^{prime}(x)text{.}$$
In other words, the main result is
$$boxed{ dfrac{text{d}}{text{d}x}int_{L(x)}^{U(x)}f(t)text{ d}t = f(U(x))U^{prime}(x)-f(L(x))L^{prime}(x)text{.}}$$





Applying to this problem, we have $f(theta) = theta tan(theta)$, $U(x) = dfrac{pi}{4}$, and $L(x) = sqrt{x}$. The derivatives are $U^{prime}(x) = 0$ and $L^{prime}(x) = dfrac{1}{2sqrt{x}}$. Hence, the derivative of $g$ is
$$g^{prime}(x) = f(U(x))U^{prime}(x)-f(L(x))L^{prime}(x) = fleft(dfrac{pi}{4}right)(0) - fleft(sqrt{x}right) cdot dfrac{1}{2sqrt{x}}$$
which simplifies to
$$g^{prime}(x) = - fleft(sqrt{x}right) cdot dfrac{1}{2sqrt{x}} = -sqrt{x}tan(sqrt{x}) cdot dfrac{1}{2sqrt{x}} = -dfrac{1}{2}tan(sqrt{x})text{.}$$






share|cite|improve this answer












After years of tutoring Calculus I, it baffles me that professors somehow expect students to figure out how to extend part I of the Fundamental Theorem of Calculus to cases where the upper limit is not $x$ and the lower limit is not a constant.



So, I will provide you with a quick, intuitive (and not rigorous) derivation on how you should approach this.



Suppose the lower limit is $L(x)$ and the upper limit is $U(x)$ of the integral. Define



$$g(x) = int_{L(x)}^{U(x)}f(t)text{ d}ttext{.}$$



Suppose $F$ is an antiderivative of $f$. By part II of the Fundamental Theorem of Calculus, you know that
$$g(x) = int_{L(x)}^{U(x)}f(t)text{ d}t = F(U(x)) - F(L(x))text{.}$$
Then, the derivative of $g$ is given by, assuming differentiability of $U$ and $L$,



$$dfrac{text{d}}{text{d}x}[g(x)] = F^{prime}(U(x))U^{prime}(x)-F^{prime}(L(x))L^{prime}(x)$$
after making use of the chain rule for derivatives. But, $F$ is an antiderivative of $f$, so $F^{prime} = f$, hence
$$dfrac{text{d}}{text{d}x}[g(x)] = f(U(x))U^{prime}(x)-f(L(x))L^{prime}(x)text{.}$$
In other words, the main result is
$$boxed{ dfrac{text{d}}{text{d}x}int_{L(x)}^{U(x)}f(t)text{ d}t = f(U(x))U^{prime}(x)-f(L(x))L^{prime}(x)text{.}}$$





Applying to this problem, we have $f(theta) = theta tan(theta)$, $U(x) = dfrac{pi}{4}$, and $L(x) = sqrt{x}$. The derivatives are $U^{prime}(x) = 0$ and $L^{prime}(x) = dfrac{1}{2sqrt{x}}$. Hence, the derivative of $g$ is
$$g^{prime}(x) = f(U(x))U^{prime}(x)-f(L(x))L^{prime}(x) = fleft(dfrac{pi}{4}right)(0) - fleft(sqrt{x}right) cdot dfrac{1}{2sqrt{x}}$$
which simplifies to
$$g^{prime}(x) = - fleft(sqrt{x}right) cdot dfrac{1}{2sqrt{x}} = -sqrt{x}tan(sqrt{x}) cdot dfrac{1}{2sqrt{x}} = -dfrac{1}{2}tan(sqrt{x})text{.}$$







share|cite|improve this answer












share|cite|improve this answer



share|cite|improve this answer










answered Nov 24 at 22:47









Clarinetist

10.8k42777




10.8k42777












  • Wow, that really is a great intuition, thank you so much! You said it's not rigorous, but it seems be a completely valid proof, and as long as it's valid the simpler the better in my opinion haha. I wish I'd seen this earlier. Thanks again!
    – James Ronald
    Nov 24 at 23:11


















  • Wow, that really is a great intuition, thank you so much! You said it's not rigorous, but it seems be a completely valid proof, and as long as it's valid the simpler the better in my opinion haha. I wish I'd seen this earlier. Thanks again!
    – James Ronald
    Nov 24 at 23:11
















Wow, that really is a great intuition, thank you so much! You said it's not rigorous, but it seems be a completely valid proof, and as long as it's valid the simpler the better in my opinion haha. I wish I'd seen this earlier. Thanks again!
– James Ronald
Nov 24 at 23:11




Wow, that really is a great intuition, thank you so much! You said it's not rigorous, but it seems be a completely valid proof, and as long as it's valid the simpler the better in my opinion haha. I wish I'd seen this earlier. Thanks again!
– James Ronald
Nov 24 at 23:11


















draft saved

draft discarded




















































Thanks for contributing an answer to Mathematics Stack Exchange!


  • Please be sure to answer the question. Provide details and share your research!

But avoid



  • Asking for help, clarification, or responding to other answers.

  • Making statements based on opinion; back them up with references or personal experience.


Use MathJax to format equations. MathJax reference.


To learn more, see our tips on writing great answers.





Some of your past answers have not been well-received, and you're in danger of being blocked from answering.


Please pay close attention to the following guidance:


  • Please be sure to answer the question. Provide details and share your research!

But avoid



  • Asking for help, clarification, or responding to other answers.

  • Making statements based on opinion; back them up with references or personal experience.


To learn more, see our tips on writing great answers.




draft saved


draft discarded














StackExchange.ready(
function () {
StackExchange.openid.initPostLogin('.new-post-login', 'https%3a%2f%2fmath.stackexchange.com%2fquestions%2f3012182%2fhow-to-find-the-derivative-of-a-definite-integral-that-has-unusual-lower-and-upp%23new-answer', 'question_page');
}
);

Post as a guest















Required, but never shown





















































Required, but never shown














Required, but never shown












Required, but never shown







Required, but never shown

































Required, but never shown














Required, but never shown












Required, but never shown







Required, but never shown







Popular posts from this blog

Wiesbaden

Marschland

Dieringhausen