![Jago Alexander](/img/default-banner.jpg)
- 6
- 54 197
Jago Alexander
เข้าร่วมเมื่อ 19 ส.ค. 2018
A channel dedicated to hard maths problems such as difficult integrals with some hard STEP questions along the way. If you have a specific question you would like me to solve in a video then message me on instagram @jagoalexander_ :)
The Gaussian Integral is DESTROYED by Feynman’s Technique
In this video I demonstrate the method used to solve the Gaussian integral using Feynman’s integration technique, I was very excited to present this video as it combines 2 of the math world’s favourite internet concepts, the Gaussian integral and Feynman’s integration technique.
If you are new here please consider subscribing and comment if you have any suggestions of improvements :)
Link to original article:
medium.com/@rthvik.07/solving-the-gaussian-integral-using-the-feynman-integration-method-215cf3cd6236
If you are new here please consider subscribing and comment if you have any suggestions of improvements :)
Link to original article:
medium.com/@rthvik.07/solving-the-gaussian-integral-using-the-feynman-integration-method-215cf3cd6236
มุมมอง: 20 433
วีดีโอ
Can you solve this integral from a Cambridge Maths Exam?
มุมมอง 2152 หลายเดือนก่อน
In this video I integrate this horrible looking integral using series expansions and many other tricks. It has a very satisfying solution. Subscribe for more maths videos
How to derive the Taylor Series for the natural logarithm
มุมมอง 2222 หลายเดือนก่อน
In this video I derive the series expansion of ln(1 x) the cool way. Of course, thank you to Taylor Swift for coming up with this fantastic maths theory.
Finding the Reflections of Points and Lines in Vector PLANES (A-Level Further Maths)
มุมมอง 1112 หลายเดือนก่อน
In this video I explain how to first find the reflection of a given point in a line. Then how to find the reflection of a given point in a plane, and finally how to find the equation of a line in a plane… This is for A-Level further maths Vectors topic. If you found this video helpful please like :)
This will be your new favourite way to integrate… (Feynman’s Technique)
มุมมอง 34K3 หลายเดือนก่อน
In this video I use maths’ / the internets most favourite integration technique known as Feynman’s technique or differentiation under the integral sign to evaluate a difficult integral of sins / x from zero to infinity. If you enjoyed this video please subscribe.
A-Level Further Maths: Finding Lines of Invariant Points and Invariant Lines
มุมมอง 3335 หลายเดือนก่อน
In this maths video I demonstrate how to find the lines of Invariant points and the Invariant lines of a given matrix. This video is for those studying A-Level Further Maths. This is from an Edexcel question, however the techniques demonstrated apply to all exam boards. If you would like to request a question for a video, don’t hesitate todem me in instagram @ jagoalexander
great vid mate
I had to regretfully stop watching your video because the music required too much of my awareness.
I quite enjoyed that. Well done 👍.
I realized that I reached the end of the video...Feynman/Chopin - worked well! Many thanks!
I personally loved the background music, helped me concentrate.😊
Best video I’ve ever seen
I did this for a school project, I found the solution in a paper by Keith Conrad if anyone is wondering where
Next e^((-x^2)/2)
That isn't any different. You just have a constant factor of ½ to correct for.
I find the music refreshing
f(0) =N*Pi/2.....so if should contain infinite solutions
do you even know what arctg is defined as?
More than one output for a single input wouldn't be a function.
HELLO DUDE GUD VID I ALSO LIKE THE MUSIC KEEP GOING
I personally would like this video without music, as a musician i find it annoying. my brain keeps telling me to listen to the music.
I think for non musicians the music makes the video much more enjoyable; dead silence as he thinks would be pretty awkward. If it truly bothers you, you can download the video and use a background music isolation AI tool online to remove it which should only take a couple mins.
Not a serious musician but I also find the piece too "rich" and the volume too high. Maybe something less complex like 1600 slow pieces instead of Listz-like stuff and a little less loud.
@@blabberblabbing8935 It's Chopin Ballade No.1. I guess the creator likes Chopin. Maybe he could choose something like Nocturne or Mazurka from him which is also fascinating.
@@catfromlothal8506 Oh my bad. Didn't sound at all like a ballad... or maybe I just acknowledged it when it went all crazy distracting fast tempo... If anything I would rather have simple stuff like Pachelbel canon and things that don't get in the way... or my way...😅
Noted @@catfromlothal8506
What application is being used to write on?
Goodnotes on Ipad
I was always taught , in the absence of x or ln, that e would be chosen as u in integration by parts. But it gives the same result.
Time very well utilized watching your program. Now to put it on paper and see how far I understood u.😮
I agree. One time for maths, one time for Chopin's ballades.
Solved easily with Laplace transform
Can Feynman's technique be applied to any integral? if not, what are the conditions for it to be applied, please?
If you can define the function of the paramater to be differentiable, then you can use it. Feynmans technique it's just differentiable under the integral sign, also know as Leibniz rule for differentiation under integral sign: If you have a function f(x,t), any differential/integral operation and their composition commute.
@@rajinfootonchuriquen I think the question is how you can find an auxiliary function like f(a) that will help to calculate the integral.
@@tommyrjensen that's only guessing. It's like asking Which technique of integration should be use? Integration it's not like differentiation, doesn't has a algorithmic "fit all" solution.
@@rajinfootonchuriquen It does not always seem like guessing. Like if an integrand is a product of two functions of which one is easy to differentiate and the other is easy to integrate, then you use integration by parts. If the integrand is a composition of functions, you use substitution. And so on. If "Feynman's technique" is useful at all, how would it not be possible to determine when and how to apply it? Doesn't seem to make sense.
You sound so honest and at the same time hilarious making the video worth to watch
Double integration is my favorite method...
A da is missing from the left-hand side of several of the steps. Apart from this, it’s pleasurable to follow the process.
Nice application of the Feynman technique. The background music sounds strange and is a distraction under accelerated playback, so maybe it can be omitted for future videos.
I don't hear any music
Very easy to follow. Good job! Keep em coming!
Awesome, thank you!
Please make videos on sieve theory
Thank you bro loved it
The reasoning about I'(a) re lim_{t->oo} isn't true if a is zero. This seems like a problem.
Very cool.
It is amazing that someone would keep playing with that until you get to the answer. I'm impressed. I think the 3D version is much easier to grasp, using infinitesimal rings, but this is more impressive in some ways.
That Feynman was one clever dude. 😀
Totally agree!
Good. But as a musician i suggest to turn off music. I cannot resist to pay attention to how Chopin Is played..
Fully agree with your observations. So did i
I am glad you made the effort to write out every step! Awesome!!!
Quantum Field Infinities Contradictory: Quantum Field Theory Feynman Diagrams with infinite terms like: ∫ d4k / (k2 - m2) = ∞ Perturbative quantum field theories rely on renormalization to subtract infinite quantities from equations, which is an ad-hoc procedure lacking conceptual justification. Non-Contradictory: Infinitesimal Regulator QFT ∫ d4k / [(k2 - m2 + ε2)1/2] < ∞ Using infinitesimals ε as regulators instead of adhoc renormalization avoids true mathematical infinities while preserving empirical results.
So true man
I think this is the best method of solving the Gaussian integral!!
You 'only' need to guess the right auxliary function to integrate and 'just know' that (arctan x)' = 1/(1 + x^2). Yes, yes, differentiating inverse trig functions is nothing compared to guessing convenient auxliary problems to solve. I'd call it: Gaussian integral made even more difficult. 😁But hey, a very nice video.
Then what method do you think is easier
Knowing the derivative of arctan is a standard result so yeah you're supposed to just know it or at the very least look it up in an integral results table. It's like integrating 1/(x+1) for example, you could waste time going the long way around or just say its Ln|x+1|. If you want to integrate the 1/(x² +1) function you use a tan trig substitution, it's just long so I skipped over it. Also nearly every method I've seen on solving the gaussian relys on "just knowing" to do certain steps, I understand it can be frustrating if certain steps aren't intuitive
@@lol1991 If you are a mathematician the result is obvious to you. If you are a physicist you'd probably prefer polar coordinates trick. Changing coordinates is bread and butter for physicists. If you are a student you're always screwed.
@@Jagoalexander Right, if the steps were intuitive we wouldn't be talking about Gaussian integral, so frustration has no place here. I am not complaining. Some people surely enjoy it more when they are taken deep into the woods and suddenly arrive at a solution.
@@WielkiKaleson Yep, physicist here, I much prefer polar coordinates. Feels very natural compared to this mess.
Interesting, but before destroying anything about Gauss they must first get near to him.
It’s beautiful. A small correction, you need to state a>0, otherwise it does not follow the limit of u as infinity.
If I’m not mistaken, even if a <0 we are always squaring it thus making it positive, and then timing by -1 thus always negative, so no matter what our A argument is whether it’s >0 or <0 we will always end up with e^(negative) which as it tends to infinity would always tend to 0
Yes this is correct, but then the working must be amended, you cannot just say u=a*x limit is infinity.
@@kostaskostas2470ohhh I see thank you
why is feynman zesty in all your video?
Hi! That was a great video. I had a question @ 5:19, How should one go about selecting what function to use if they're trying to solve an integral for the first time with feynman's technique?
ballade no 1!
Wonderful.
Sorry for the music being a bit loud 😅
No worries, Ballade No.1, one of my favourites
what app is this?? the one u are writing on??
Goodnotes on IOS on my ipad
Use Feynman's trick let I(a)=int_0^(oo) [1-exp(-ax)]*exp(-x)/x dx I’(a)= int_0^(infity) exp[-(a+1)x] dx=1/(1+a) I(a)=ln(1+a)+c, I(0)=c=0 I(a)=ln(1+a) # The general form is int_0^(oo) [exp(-ax)-exp(-bx)]/x dx =ln(b/a) Original question can rewrite int_0^(oo) [exp(-x)-exp(-(1+a)x)]/x dx =ln(1+a)
Fabulous!!!
The Feynman "trick" is an embarrassment of riches
I love obi wan teaching me calculus!
Haha what?
Sin x = 1/1! x - 1/3! x³ + 1/5! x⁵ - .... So sin x /x = 1/1! - 1/3! x² + 1/5! x⁴ - .... And the I tergal is just : ∫ Sin x/x . dx = 1/1! x - 1/3! x³/3 + 1/5! x⁵/5 - .... + (-1)^n 1/n!. x^n /n +... You can also integrate many functions including the naughty function f(x)= e^x² which is otherwise does not have an explicit formula of integral. Off course with a condition of being an analytic function.
Integral of sin(x) / x dx from 0 to infinity is a classic. Here's an algebraic approach. It does extend into the patterns of series, binomial theorem - identities, as well as the complex plane: This may not be a complete proof or solution, but it illustrates the point. I find this to be another decent approach towards evaluating or trying to solve it. Setup and a few basic common principles: Not all of them may be directly used but are good and useful to keep in mind. Slope-Intercept form of a line y = mx + b. Slope formula: m = (y2-y1)/(x2-x1) = deltaY/deltaX = sin(t)/cos(t) = tan(t) where t is the angle theta between the line y = mx+b and the +x-axis. Initial Conditions: m = 1, b = 0. Constraints: b will always be 0. Simplification: y = 1*x + 0 <==> y = x. Substitutions: y = mx == y = sin(t)/cos(t) * x == x * tan(t). We can write this as sin(t) / t. The thing to recognize here is that the integration here is in relation to the angle, as opposed to the x - dx form. We know that 90 degrees or PI/2 radians is a Right Angle. We know that, multiplying by the imaginary unit i vector has the same exact effect of rotating by 90 degrees and by multiplying any value by i^(4*N) where N is an +Integer is the same as multiplying by 1 since it rotates it by 360 degrees or 2PI radians. Taking the graph of this function and looking for the area under the curve can be broken down into intervals based on the properties and relationships between PI/2 and i within the context of the summation of their series that converges to PI/2 or 90 Degrees. The Series: n=0 |--> +infinity of: (2n)!! / (2n+1)!! * (1/2)^n = PI/2 The double factorial (!!) is define by 0!! = 1!! and n!! = n(n-2)!! Then: f(t) = Series: n=0 |--> +infinity of: (-1)^n / (2n+1) * t^n Note that f(1) = PI/4. We can take the Euler Transform of the series: 1/(1-t) * f( t / (1-t) = OuterSum: n=0 |--> +infinity { InnerSum: k=0 |-->n ( n : choose k) ( -1)^k / (2k + 1) } * t^n Then: Sum: k = 0 |--> n (n: choose k) (-1)^k/(2k+1) = (2n)!! / (2n + 1)!! Proving the above just refer to proving a binomial sum identity. We can see that: The Integral from 0 to infinity of Sin(x)/x dx is equal to: The Series: n=0 |--> +infinity {(2n)!!/(2n+1)!!}*(1/2)^n = PI/2. Forgive me if there's any typos in the math... "Y.T." isn't very friendly with their parsing of comments. Here's a link for the above Series: math.stackexchange.com/a/14116/405427
Absolutely brilliant
Love the « in the a world »
You know a guy is genius when he invents a new way to integrate!
What’s funny is Feynman had an average IQ the guy just developed extraordinary thinking techniques. So it’s possible for you and I as well!
he popularized it, clearly not invented. would not be surprised if even Euler used it
I think this is a two-part trick method. First trick part comes from the need to “temperate” the integrand, which is swinging wildly. (Btw, we need to state, right off the bat, that a is positive.) This way we get a function, the temperated integrand, whose integral on [0,infinity) is finite. The second trick part is to use differentiation (under integral) wrt the parameter of the “temperator”.
I was upset about the dx until you fixed it! I found this derivation in high school, and loved it, and only now as an undergrad can I appreciate this technique's similarity to the Laplace or Fourier transform.
"Feynman Technique" is TH-cam's favorite moniker for "The method of integration by-parts". Just open up any elementary calculus book written before Feynman was born.
incorrect, this is a different technique involving the introduction of a completely new variable
@@Cow.cool. again this "trick" was known way before Feyman. Only physics enthusiasts with insufficient math background would refer to it as "Feynman technique", Feynman himself never claimed over such a thing. Some Feyman's pupils may have referred to it as Feyman's teqnique because they did not see this method prior to taking Feynman's lecture. He's a great scientist and had great contributions to the field of QFT, but this is not his "technique".