Anonymous user
Talk:Gamma function: Difference between revisions
→Integrals: ot
(Complex field?) |
(→Integrals: ot) |
||
Line 3:
: Hmm, I never saw this form in mathematical literature. Technically, there is no any multiplication of ''f(x)'' by ''dx''. You cannot commute them, if you meant that. And integral operator is not equal to definite integral. The definite integral using the integral operator would be sort of: <math>{\int f}\mid_a^b</math>. --[[User:Dmitry-kazakov|Dmitry-kazakov]] 20:55, 5 March 2009 (UTC)
:: I did my math in my life, and I've seen it. Seen or not, there's a simple analogy between <math>\textstyle\frac{d}{dx}</math> and <math>\textstyle\int dx</math>. Going into ''definite thing'', there's no a rule stating that <math>\textstyle\int_{x_0}^{x_1} dx f(x)</math> can't mean the integral of f(x) computed between x<sub>0</sub> and x<sub>1</sub>; the analogy with derivative could be <math>\textstyle\left(\frac{d}{dx}f(x)\right)_{x=x_0}</math> (or any of the form you prefer to say the derivative of f(x) computed in x<sub>0</sub>); no need for the integral to put limits "outside" the "operator boundary" like your attempt <math>\textstyle\left.\int f\right|_a^b</math>. More close analogy would be with the sum <math>\textstyle\sum_{i=1}^{N} f(x_i)</math> (the integral sign is nothing but an S). But this discussion is OT for RC. Mine was not an error, I will write it the same way for other "math" tasks; no need to ''fix'' it. --[[User:ShinTakezou|ShinTakezou]] 11:34, 6 March 2009 (UTC)
==Complex field==
| |||