|
From: | Raymond E. Rogers |
Subject: | Re: [Axiom-developer] please check your Schaums |
Date: | Mon, 28 Apr 2008 08:45:45 -0400 |
User-agent: | Thunderbird 2.0.0.12 (X11/20080226) |
Doug Stewart wrote:
According to "Table of Integrals, Series, and Products" I.S. Gradshteyn/I.M. Ryzhik; Axiom is right. In fact a dimensional analysis says that Schaums must be wrong. My personal integration says that Axiom/"Table.." are off by a constant, but it's hard to argue about a constant of integration. The meaning of that statement is: set y=x/a and evaluate, then back substitute and multiply by a to get F(x/a); having done that you would get log((x/a)^2+1) as the trailing terms. But this is the same with a constant difference.address@hidden wrote:My schaums is the same as your Schaums but it is old (not as old as yours) I have a New Schaums at work But I will not Be in to work today :-)In 14.661 Schaums claims: integral acoth(x/a) = x*acoth(x)+a/2*log(x^2-a^2) ^^^^^^^^ Axiom claims integral acoth(x/a) = x*acoth(x/a)+a/2*log(x^2-a^2) ^^^^^^^^^^ Is this a Schaums typo? Tim _______________________________________________ Axiom-developer mailing list address@hidden http://lists.nongnu.org/mailman/listinfo/axiom-developerMy Maxima agrees with Axium. integrate(acoth(x/a),x); (%o8) (a*log(x^2/a^2-1))/2+x*acoth(x/a)
RayR
[Prev in Thread] | Current Thread | [Next in Thread] |