Talk:Table of integrals

From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

Should we include definite integrals (e.g. gamma functions, var. functions involving ex integrated) here? Should we include formulae like integrating by parts? - Paddu

Contents

[edit] What about some simple stuff, too?

It seems like you don't have some simple stuff indeed, which young students often need, such as, for example: \int \sqrt x\,\,dx

I think all the 'simple' integrals are covered. In your particular example, we're hoping the students would know that \sqrt {x} = x^{1/2}, so {1 \over 2} can be substituted for n in \int x^n\,dx = \frac{x^{n+1}}{n+1} + C, which is on the page. -- Jacottier 04:10, Apr 10, 2005 (UTC)
I found \int \sqrt{1 + x^2}\,\,dx in the list of integrals of irrational functions but it seems that simple forms such as this one should be presented on the fisrt few pages and more comple forms put in the back -- Rtdrury 22:59, 28 November 2005 (UTC)

[edit] logs

What about \int \log_a x dx = {x\ln|x| - x \over \ln a} + c?

[edit] General form or the particular form

While I see your point about the Gaussian integral, Oleg, from my point of view as a scientist, it's much more convenient to have the more general form. I've never seen a table of integrals without this more general form. If this is not the appropriate article for the more general forms of integrals, where might I find such an article? Ed Sanville 19:52, 23 May 2005 (UTC)

OK, I don't feel strongly about it. I did not want a parameter in there since the other formulas around it did not have a parameter, and since putting that parameter did not add value. But I see your point. If you wish, you of course can add that back. Oleg Alexandrov 22:55, 23 May 2005 (UTC)

[edit] correct?

at cos^n, is there not a "-" too much?--80.144.112.154 14:54, 24 December 2005 (UTC)

[edit]  ?

Is there any reason why wikipedia doesn't have a real table of integrals? I realize that there are other sources, but a good table (that includes the derivation of each integral) can be a useful thing. Perhaps no one has just done it yet? 24.59.193.0 03:45, 8 March 2006 (UTC)

I agree, and also there is a complete lack of complex intedrals. Derivations should be very usefull, perhaps each derivation should have its own page? --Ravn 08:12, 28 April 2006 (UTC)

Retrieved from "http://en.wikipedia.org../../../t/a/b/Talk%7ETable_of_integrals_4090.html"