Is a definite integral just a summation?












3












$begingroup$


I am learning about definite integrals and found the formula for finding an average of a function over a given interval:



$$frac{1}{b-a} int_{a}^{b} fleft(xright) dx$$



If we look at the average function for a set of numbers:
$$frac{1}{n} sum_{i=1}^{n} x_i$$



It would seem as if the integral is essentially a summation of all values from $a$ to $b$. Is it correct to think of it this way?






calculus definite-integrals means







share|cite|improve this question









$endgroup$








  • 2




    $begingroup$
    Yeah; that's exactly how one would think of it. This becomes more clear if you look at the formal definition of an integral.
    $endgroup$
    – Hyperion
    2 hours ago






  • 1




    $begingroup$
    Notice that the functional values have been multiplied by $dx$, so $f(x)dx$ is the area of the elemental strip having thickness $dx$ and height $f(x)$. The integral can be treated as a summation of these differential areas
    $endgroup$
    – Shubham Johri
    2 hours ago
















3












$begingroup$


I am learning about definite integrals and found the formula for finding an average of a function over a given interval:



$$frac{1}{b-a} int_{a}^{b} fleft(xright) dx$$



If we look at the average function for a set of numbers:
$$frac{1}{n} sum_{i=1}^{n} x_i$$



It would seem as if the integral is essentially a summation of all values from $a$ to $b$. Is it correct to think of it this way?






calculus definite-integrals means







share|cite|improve this question









$endgroup$








  • 2




    $begingroup$
    Yeah; that's exactly how one would think of it. This becomes more clear if you look at the formal definition of an integral.
    $endgroup$
    – Hyperion
    2 hours ago






  • 1




    $begingroup$
    Notice that the functional values have been multiplied by $dx$, so $f(x)dx$ is the area of the elemental strip having thickness $dx$ and height $f(x)$. The integral can be treated as a summation of these differential areas
    $endgroup$
    – Shubham Johri
    2 hours ago














3












3








3





$begingroup$


I am learning about definite integrals and found the formula for finding an average of a function over a given interval:



$$frac{1}{b-a} int_{a}^{b} fleft(xright) dx$$



If we look at the average function for a set of numbers:
$$frac{1}{n} sum_{i=1}^{n} x_i$$



It would seem as if the integral is essentially a summation of all values from $a$ to $b$. Is it correct to think of it this way?






calculus definite-integrals means







share|cite|improve this question









$endgroup$




I am learning about definite integrals and found the formula for finding an average of a function over a given interval:



$$frac{1}{b-a} int_{a}^{b} fleft(xright) dx$$



If we look at the average function for a set of numbers:
$$frac{1}{n} sum_{i=1}^{n} x_i$$



It would seem as if the integral is essentially a summation of all values from $a$ to $b$. Is it correct to think of it this way?






calculus definite-integrals means




calculus definite-integrals means






share|cite|improve this question













share|cite|improve this question











share|cite|improve this question




share|cite|improve this question










asked 2 hours ago









MCMasteryMCMastery

1598




1598








  • 2




    $begingroup$
    Yeah; that's exactly how one would think of it. This becomes more clear if you look at the formal definition of an integral.
    $endgroup$
    – Hyperion
    2 hours ago






  • 1




    $begingroup$
    Notice that the functional values have been multiplied by $dx$, so $f(x)dx$ is the area of the elemental strip having thickness $dx$ and height $f(x)$. The integral can be treated as a summation of these differential areas
    $endgroup$
    – Shubham Johri
    2 hours ago














  • 2




    $begingroup$
    Yeah; that's exactly how one would think of it. This becomes more clear if you look at the formal definition of an integral.
    $endgroup$
    – Hyperion
    2 hours ago






  • 1




    $begingroup$
    Notice that the functional values have been multiplied by $dx$, so $f(x)dx$ is the area of the elemental strip having thickness $dx$ and height $f(x)$. The integral can be treated as a summation of these differential areas
    $endgroup$
    – Shubham Johri
    2 hours ago








2




2




$begingroup$
Yeah; that's exactly how one would think of it. This becomes more clear if you look at the formal definition of an integral.
$endgroup$
– Hyperion
2 hours ago




$begingroup$
Yeah; that's exactly how one would think of it. This becomes more clear if you look at the formal definition of an integral.
$endgroup$
– Hyperion
2 hours ago




1




1




$begingroup$
Notice that the functional values have been multiplied by $dx$, so $f(x)dx$ is the area of the elemental strip having thickness $dx$ and height $f(x)$. The integral can be treated as a summation of these differential areas
$endgroup$
– Shubham Johri
2 hours ago




$begingroup$
Notice that the functional values have been multiplied by $dx$, so $f(x)dx$ is the area of the elemental strip having thickness $dx$ and height $f(x)$. The integral can be treated as a summation of these differential areas
$endgroup$
– Shubham Johri
2 hours ago










2 Answers
2






active

oldest

votes


















3












$begingroup$

It's certainly helpful to think of integrals this way, though not strictly correct. An integral takes all the little slivers of area beneath a curve and sums them up into a bigger area - though there's, of course, a lot of technicality needed to think about it this way.




There is an idea being obscured by your idea of an integral as a sum, however. In truth, a sum is a kind of integral and not vice versa - this is somewhat counterintuitive given that sums are much more familiar objects than integrals, but there's an elegant theory known as Lebesgue integration which basically makes the integral a tool which eats two pieces of information:




  • We start with some indexing set and some way to "weigh" pieces of that set.


  • We have some function on that set.



Then, the Lebesgue integral spits out the weighted "sum" of that function.



An integral in the most common sense arises when you say, "I have a function on the real numbers, and I want an interval to have weight equal to its length." A finite sum arises when you say "I have a function taking values $x_1,ldots,x_n$ on the index set ${1,ldots,n}$. Each index gets weight $1$" - and, of course, you can change those weights to get a weighted sum or you can extend the indexing set to every natural number to get an infinite sum. But, the basic thing to note is that there's a more general idea of integral that places summation as part of the theory of integration.






share|cite|improve this answer









$endgroup$





















    1












    $begingroup$

    Yes, and no. In so much as the definite integral is a "sum" it is a limit of a Riemann sum as the "mesh" goes to zero. The "mesh" is the largest part of a partition. That is, your domain is broken up into parts over which you take the average value of your function, and multiply by the width of that part.



    It's typically helpful to think about definite integrals as sums over "infinitesimal" displacements, but strictly speaking, that is incorrect.






    share|cite|improve this answer









    $endgroup$













      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',
      autoActivateHeartbeat: false,
      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%2f3091706%2fis-a-definite-integral-just-a-summation%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









      3












      $begingroup$

      It's certainly helpful to think of integrals this way, though not strictly correct. An integral takes all the little slivers of area beneath a curve and sums them up into a bigger area - though there's, of course, a lot of technicality needed to think about it this way.




      There is an idea being obscured by your idea of an integral as a sum, however. In truth, a sum is a kind of integral and not vice versa - this is somewhat counterintuitive given that sums are much more familiar objects than integrals, but there's an elegant theory known as Lebesgue integration which basically makes the integral a tool which eats two pieces of information:




      • We start with some indexing set and some way to "weigh" pieces of that set.


      • We have some function on that set.



      Then, the Lebesgue integral spits out the weighted "sum" of that function.



      An integral in the most common sense arises when you say, "I have a function on the real numbers, and I want an interval to have weight equal to its length." A finite sum arises when you say "I have a function taking values $x_1,ldots,x_n$ on the index set ${1,ldots,n}$. Each index gets weight $1$" - and, of course, you can change those weights to get a weighted sum or you can extend the indexing set to every natural number to get an infinite sum. But, the basic thing to note is that there's a more general idea of integral that places summation as part of the theory of integration.






      share|cite|improve this answer









      $endgroup$


















        3












        $begingroup$

        It's certainly helpful to think of integrals this way, though not strictly correct. An integral takes all the little slivers of area beneath a curve and sums them up into a bigger area - though there's, of course, a lot of technicality needed to think about it this way.




        There is an idea being obscured by your idea of an integral as a sum, however. In truth, a sum is a kind of integral and not vice versa - this is somewhat counterintuitive given that sums are much more familiar objects than integrals, but there's an elegant theory known as Lebesgue integration which basically makes the integral a tool which eats two pieces of information:




        • We start with some indexing set and some way to "weigh" pieces of that set.


        • We have some function on that set.



        Then, the Lebesgue integral spits out the weighted "sum" of that function.



        An integral in the most common sense arises when you say, "I have a function on the real numbers, and I want an interval to have weight equal to its length." A finite sum arises when you say "I have a function taking values $x_1,ldots,x_n$ on the index set ${1,ldots,n}$. Each index gets weight $1$" - and, of course, you can change those weights to get a weighted sum or you can extend the indexing set to every natural number to get an infinite sum. But, the basic thing to note is that there's a more general idea of integral that places summation as part of the theory of integration.






        share|cite|improve this answer









        $endgroup$
















          3












          3








          3





          $begingroup$

          It's certainly helpful to think of integrals this way, though not strictly correct. An integral takes all the little slivers of area beneath a curve and sums them up into a bigger area - though there's, of course, a lot of technicality needed to think about it this way.




          There is an idea being obscured by your idea of an integral as a sum, however. In truth, a sum is a kind of integral and not vice versa - this is somewhat counterintuitive given that sums are much more familiar objects than integrals, but there's an elegant theory known as Lebesgue integration which basically makes the integral a tool which eats two pieces of information:




          • We start with some indexing set and some way to "weigh" pieces of that set.


          • We have some function on that set.



          Then, the Lebesgue integral spits out the weighted "sum" of that function.



          An integral in the most common sense arises when you say, "I have a function on the real numbers, and I want an interval to have weight equal to its length." A finite sum arises when you say "I have a function taking values $x_1,ldots,x_n$ on the index set ${1,ldots,n}$. Each index gets weight $1$" - and, of course, you can change those weights to get a weighted sum or you can extend the indexing set to every natural number to get an infinite sum. But, the basic thing to note is that there's a more general idea of integral that places summation as part of the theory of integration.






          share|cite|improve this answer









          $endgroup$



          It's certainly helpful to think of integrals this way, though not strictly correct. An integral takes all the little slivers of area beneath a curve and sums them up into a bigger area - though there's, of course, a lot of technicality needed to think about it this way.




          There is an idea being obscured by your idea of an integral as a sum, however. In truth, a sum is a kind of integral and not vice versa - this is somewhat counterintuitive given that sums are much more familiar objects than integrals, but there's an elegant theory known as Lebesgue integration which basically makes the integral a tool which eats two pieces of information:




          • We start with some indexing set and some way to "weigh" pieces of that set.


          • We have some function on that set.



          Then, the Lebesgue integral spits out the weighted "sum" of that function.



          An integral in the most common sense arises when you say, "I have a function on the real numbers, and I want an interval to have weight equal to its length." A finite sum arises when you say "I have a function taking values $x_1,ldots,x_n$ on the index set ${1,ldots,n}$. Each index gets weight $1$" - and, of course, you can change those weights to get a weighted sum or you can extend the indexing set to every natural number to get an infinite sum. But, the basic thing to note is that there's a more general idea of integral that places summation as part of the theory of integration.







          share|cite|improve this answer












          share|cite|improve this answer



          share|cite|improve this answer










          answered 2 hours ago









          Milo BrandtMilo Brandt

          39.6k475139




          39.6k475139























              1












              $begingroup$

              Yes, and no. In so much as the definite integral is a "sum" it is a limit of a Riemann sum as the "mesh" goes to zero. The "mesh" is the largest part of a partition. That is, your domain is broken up into parts over which you take the average value of your function, and multiply by the width of that part.



              It's typically helpful to think about definite integrals as sums over "infinitesimal" displacements, but strictly speaking, that is incorrect.






              share|cite|improve this answer









              $endgroup$


















                1












                $begingroup$

                Yes, and no. In so much as the definite integral is a "sum" it is a limit of a Riemann sum as the "mesh" goes to zero. The "mesh" is the largest part of a partition. That is, your domain is broken up into parts over which you take the average value of your function, and multiply by the width of that part.



                It's typically helpful to think about definite integrals as sums over "infinitesimal" displacements, but strictly speaking, that is incorrect.






                share|cite|improve this answer









                $endgroup$
















                  1












                  1








                  1





                  $begingroup$

                  Yes, and no. In so much as the definite integral is a "sum" it is a limit of a Riemann sum as the "mesh" goes to zero. The "mesh" is the largest part of a partition. That is, your domain is broken up into parts over which you take the average value of your function, and multiply by the width of that part.



                  It's typically helpful to think about definite integrals as sums over "infinitesimal" displacements, but strictly speaking, that is incorrect.






                  share|cite|improve this answer









                  $endgroup$



                  Yes, and no. In so much as the definite integral is a "sum" it is a limit of a Riemann sum as the "mesh" goes to zero. The "mesh" is the largest part of a partition. That is, your domain is broken up into parts over which you take the average value of your function, and multiply by the width of that part.



                  It's typically helpful to think about definite integrals as sums over "infinitesimal" displacements, but strictly speaking, that is incorrect.







                  share|cite|improve this answer












                  share|cite|improve this answer



                  share|cite|improve this answer










                  answered 2 hours ago









                  Steven HattonSteven Hatton

                  915418




                  915418






























                      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.




                      draft saved


                      draft discarded














                      StackExchange.ready(
                      function () {
                      StackExchange.openid.initPostLogin('.new-post-login', 'https%3a%2f%2fmath.stackexchange.com%2fquestions%2f3091706%2fis-a-definite-integral-just-a-summation%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

                      Сан-Квентин

                      Image
                      Сан-Квентин Местоположение Сан-Квентин, Калифорния Координаты 37°56′13″ с. ш. 122°29′20″ з. д. H G Я O L Текущий статус Действует Режим безопасности минимальный и максимальный Количество мест 3 302 Открытие Июнь 1852 Находится в ведомстве California Department of Corrections and Rehabilitation Начальник Mike Martel, начальник  Сан-Квентин на Викискладе Сан-Квентин (англ.  San Quentin ) — тюрьма, располагающаяся на 432 акрах (около 1,7 км²), на мысе Сан-Квентин, в округе Марин, штат Калифорния, США. Тюрьма штата Калифорния Сан-Квентин была открыта в июле 1852 года и является старейшей в штате. Она была построена заключёнными, которые проживали в течение строительства на тюремном судне Вабан. В Сан-Квентине отбывали наказание и мужчины, и женщины до 1934 года, когда построили женскую тюрьму в Техачапи и туда перевели всех заключённых женщин. В Сан-Квентине приводятся в исполнение смертные казни, для этого имеется газовая камера, но
                      Read more

                      Алькесар

                      Image
                      Муниципалитет Алькесар Alquézar Герб 42°10′16″ с. ш. 0°01′27″ в. д. H G Я O L Страна Испания   Испания Автономное сообщество Арагон Провинция Уэска Комарка Сомонтано-де-Барбастро Алькальд Хосе Марияно Альтемир Ласкорс (ИСРП) История и география Площадь 32,36 км² Высота НУМ 660 м Часовой пояс UTC+1, летом UTC+2 Население Население 313 человек ( 2010 ) Плотность 9,92 чел./км² Этнохороним alquezarano/-a Цифровые идентификаторы Телефонный код +34 974 Почтовые индексы 22112 Автомобильный код HU alquezar.org   (исп.) Показать/скрыть карты Алькесар Алькесар Алькесар  Аудио, фото и видео на Викискладе Алькесар (исп.  Alquézar ) — муниципалитет в Испании, входит в провинцию Уэска, в составе автономного сообщества Арагон. Муниципалитет находится в составе района (комарки) Сомонтано-де-Барбастро. Занимает площадь 32,36 км². Население — 321 челове
                      Read more

                      Josef Freinademetz

                      Image
                      San Ujöp (Giuseppe/Josef) Freinademetz Josef Freinademetz in abiti cinesi   Religioso e missionario   Nascita 15 aprile 1852 Morte 28 gennaio 1908 Venerato da Chiesa cattolica Beatificazione 1975 Canonizzazione 5 ottobre 2003 Ricorrenza 28 gennaio Manuale Ujöp Freinademetz noto anche come Giuseppe o Josef Freinademetz (Oies, 15 aprile 1852 – Taikia, 28 gennaio 1908) è stato un presbitero austriaco, membro della Società del Verbo Divino, fu missionario in Cina; è venerato come santo dalla Chiesa cattolica. .mw-parser-output .citazione-table{margin-bottom:.5em;font-size:95%}.mw-parser-output .citazione-table td{padding:0 1.2em 0 2.4em}.mw-parser-output .citazione-lang{vertical-align:top}.mw-parser-output .citazione-lang td{width:50%}.mw-parser-output .citazione-lang td:first-child{padding:0 0 0 2.4em}.mw-parser-output .citazione-lang td:nth-child(2){padding:0 1.2em} «Io amo la Cina e i cinesi; voglio morire in mezzo a loro, e tra loro
                      Read more