Integrating linearly

The name of the pictureThe name of the pictureThe name of the pictureClash Royale CLAN TAG#URR8PPP











up vote
4
down vote

favorite












I came across this question and just want to make sure my understanding is correct.



I need to find the general solution of:



$$
fracdxdt = a(1 - x)
$$



In this case, I'm finding the how $x$ changes with respect to $t$ so I'm integrating with respect to $t$. Does that mean the answer is $at - xat + C$?



Thanks :)










share|cite|improve this question



















  • 2




    You cannot integrate over $t$ if you have $x$ in the integral, which depends on $t$ in a yet unknown way. Separate the variables, it's the first elementary procedure you must learn to solve differential equations. Once you have $x$ on the left and $t$ on the right, you can proceed.
    – orion
    Aug 21 at 9:27










  • If $x(t) = t^2$, for example, then $int x, dt$ is clearly not $tx$.
    – anomaly
    Aug 21 at 19:57














up vote
4
down vote

favorite












I came across this question and just want to make sure my understanding is correct.



I need to find the general solution of:



$$
fracdxdt = a(1 - x)
$$



In this case, I'm finding the how $x$ changes with respect to $t$ so I'm integrating with respect to $t$. Does that mean the answer is $at - xat + C$?



Thanks :)










share|cite|improve this question



















  • 2




    You cannot integrate over $t$ if you have $x$ in the integral, which depends on $t$ in a yet unknown way. Separate the variables, it's the first elementary procedure you must learn to solve differential equations. Once you have $x$ on the left and $t$ on the right, you can proceed.
    – orion
    Aug 21 at 9:27










  • If $x(t) = t^2$, for example, then $int x, dt$ is clearly not $tx$.
    – anomaly
    Aug 21 at 19:57












up vote
4
down vote

favorite









up vote
4
down vote

favorite











I came across this question and just want to make sure my understanding is correct.



I need to find the general solution of:



$$
fracdxdt = a(1 - x)
$$



In this case, I'm finding the how $x$ changes with respect to $t$ so I'm integrating with respect to $t$. Does that mean the answer is $at - xat + C$?



Thanks :)










share|cite|improve this question















I came across this question and just want to make sure my understanding is correct.



I need to find the general solution of:



$$
fracdxdt = a(1 - x)
$$



In this case, I'm finding the how $x$ changes with respect to $t$ so I'm integrating with respect to $t$. Does that mean the answer is $at - xat + C$?



Thanks :)







calculus integration






share|cite|improve this question















share|cite|improve this question













share|cite|improve this question




share|cite|improve this question








edited Aug 21 at 15:47









CulDeVu

15726




15726










asked Aug 21 at 9:23









Hews

515




515







  • 2




    You cannot integrate over $t$ if you have $x$ in the integral, which depends on $t$ in a yet unknown way. Separate the variables, it's the first elementary procedure you must learn to solve differential equations. Once you have $x$ on the left and $t$ on the right, you can proceed.
    – orion
    Aug 21 at 9:27










  • If $x(t) = t^2$, for example, then $int x, dt$ is clearly not $tx$.
    – anomaly
    Aug 21 at 19:57












  • 2




    You cannot integrate over $t$ if you have $x$ in the integral, which depends on $t$ in a yet unknown way. Separate the variables, it's the first elementary procedure you must learn to solve differential equations. Once you have $x$ on the left and $t$ on the right, you can proceed.
    – orion
    Aug 21 at 9:27










  • If $x(t) = t^2$, for example, then $int x, dt$ is clearly not $tx$.
    – anomaly
    Aug 21 at 19:57







2




2




You cannot integrate over $t$ if you have $x$ in the integral, which depends on $t$ in a yet unknown way. Separate the variables, it's the first elementary procedure you must learn to solve differential equations. Once you have $x$ on the left and $t$ on the right, you can proceed.
– orion
Aug 21 at 9:27




You cannot integrate over $t$ if you have $x$ in the integral, which depends on $t$ in a yet unknown way. Separate the variables, it's the first elementary procedure you must learn to solve differential equations. Once you have $x$ on the left and $t$ on the right, you can proceed.
– orion
Aug 21 at 9:27












If $x(t) = t^2$, for example, then $int x, dt$ is clearly not $tx$.
– anomaly
Aug 21 at 19:57




If $x(t) = t^2$, for example, then $int x, dt$ is clearly not $tx$.
– anomaly
Aug 21 at 19:57










4 Answers
4






active

oldest

votes

















up vote
8
down vote













You can't say that, simply because the function $x$ has a dependence in $t$ !






share|cite|improve this answer



























    up vote
    7
    down vote













    If you are given, for $x=x(t)$
    $$fracdxdt = a(1-x)$$



    Then, one can re-arrange (by abuse of notation), giving
    beginalign
    fracdx1-x &= a, dt \
    implies int left(frac11-xright)dx &= a int dt
    endalign
    The right hand side is straightforward for you, the left requires some knowledge of standard integrals.



    Does this help?






    share|cite|improve this answer






















    • Awesome! Thanks for your help, does this lead to the answer "-ln(1-x) = at + C"?
      – Hews
      Aug 21 at 9:40










    • Yes. You probably want to turn it around and express $x$ in terms of $t$, and possibly rename the constant $e^-C$ to something else, as in this form has clearer meaning in the final function compared to just $C$.
      – orion
      Aug 21 at 9:45










    • @orion not possibly, but necessarily. Even if we consider complex values of $C$, there is a value $e^-C$ can’t reach, namely 0, but the corresponding solution, the constant function $x=1$, is very much a valid solution of the original equation.
      – Roman Odaisky
      Aug 21 at 15:33










    • @Hews Yes that is exactly right, but as other posters point out, you possible would prefer to rearrange into $x= ldots$
      – Kevin
      Aug 22 at 13:41










    • So to express x in terms of t, does it end as x = e^(at)e(-C) - 1?. Thanks for your help everyone!
      – Hews
      Aug 22 at 23:25

















    up vote
    3
    down vote













    You must write



    $$fracdx1-x=a dt$$






    share|cite|improve this answer



























      up vote
      2
      down vote













      If you write it as $dx = a(1-x)dt$ then it would be correct to integrate $x$ with respect to $t$. The trouble is, to perform the integration correctly, you would need to know what the dependence of $x$ on $t$ is, which is what you're trying to find out in the first place. To see what the problem with $int xdt =xt+C$ is, consider any function, e.g. $x=t$. If we substitute $t$ in for $x$ before integrating, we get $int tdt =frac t^22+C$. But if we use $int xdt =xt+C$ and substitute $t$ in for $x$ afterwards, we get $int xdt =t^2+C$, which is off by a factor of 2. Or if $x = sin(t)$, then we would have $int sin(t)dt=tsin(t)+C$ instead of $int sin(t)dt = cos(t)+C$. If we had that $int f(t)dt =tf(t)+C$, that would make the whole concept of an integral rather trivial; the integral of any function would just be that function times the independent variable. The identity $int xdt=xt+C$ works only if $x$ doesn't depend on $t$. Remember, an integral can be interpreted as the area under a curve. If $x$ is a constant, then we just have a rectangle with width $t$ and height $x$, so the area is $xt$. But if $x$ is varying with $t$, then we can't just take the value of $x$ at the end of the interval; clearly the area is going to depend on what $x$ is doing in between.



      Note that if you get familiar with basic differential forms, you should get to a point where you recognize that when the derivative is proportional to the function value, you have an exponential function. In this case, the differential equation is modified by a constant term. So if you take the test solution $x = c_1e^c_2t+c_3$, solve for the derivative in terms of $c_1$, $c_2$, and $c_3$, and then plug that into the differential equation, then you can solve for $c_1$, $c_2$, and $c_3$. Note that one degree of freedom will remain, since this is a first-order equation and no initial condition is given.






      share|cite|improve this answer






















        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',
        convertImagesToLinks: true,
        noModals: false,
        showLowRepImageUploadWarning: true,
        reputationToPostImages: 10,
        bindNavPrevention: true,
        postfix: "",
        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%2f2889665%2fintegrating-linearly%23new-answer', 'question_page');

        );

        Post as a guest






























        4 Answers
        4






        active

        oldest

        votes








        4 Answers
        4






        active

        oldest

        votes









        active

        oldest

        votes






        active

        oldest

        votes








        up vote
        8
        down vote













        You can't say that, simply because the function $x$ has a dependence in $t$ !






        share|cite|improve this answer
























          up vote
          8
          down vote













          You can't say that, simply because the function $x$ has a dependence in $t$ !






          share|cite|improve this answer






















            up vote
            8
            down vote










            up vote
            8
            down vote









            You can't say that, simply because the function $x$ has a dependence in $t$ !






            share|cite|improve this answer












            You can't say that, simply because the function $x$ has a dependence in $t$ !







            share|cite|improve this answer












            share|cite|improve this answer



            share|cite|improve this answer










            answered Aug 21 at 9:26









            tmaths

            1,334113




            1,334113




















                up vote
                7
                down vote













                If you are given, for $x=x(t)$
                $$fracdxdt = a(1-x)$$



                Then, one can re-arrange (by abuse of notation), giving
                beginalign
                fracdx1-x &= a, dt \
                implies int left(frac11-xright)dx &= a int dt
                endalign
                The right hand side is straightforward for you, the left requires some knowledge of standard integrals.



                Does this help?






                share|cite|improve this answer






















                • Awesome! Thanks for your help, does this lead to the answer "-ln(1-x) = at + C"?
                  – Hews
                  Aug 21 at 9:40










                • Yes. You probably want to turn it around and express $x$ in terms of $t$, and possibly rename the constant $e^-C$ to something else, as in this form has clearer meaning in the final function compared to just $C$.
                  – orion
                  Aug 21 at 9:45










                • @orion not possibly, but necessarily. Even if we consider complex values of $C$, there is a value $e^-C$ can’t reach, namely 0, but the corresponding solution, the constant function $x=1$, is very much a valid solution of the original equation.
                  – Roman Odaisky
                  Aug 21 at 15:33










                • @Hews Yes that is exactly right, but as other posters point out, you possible would prefer to rearrange into $x= ldots$
                  – Kevin
                  Aug 22 at 13:41










                • So to express x in terms of t, does it end as x = e^(at)e(-C) - 1?. Thanks for your help everyone!
                  – Hews
                  Aug 22 at 23:25














                up vote
                7
                down vote













                If you are given, for $x=x(t)$
                $$fracdxdt = a(1-x)$$



                Then, one can re-arrange (by abuse of notation), giving
                beginalign
                fracdx1-x &= a, dt \
                implies int left(frac11-xright)dx &= a int dt
                endalign
                The right hand side is straightforward for you, the left requires some knowledge of standard integrals.



                Does this help?






                share|cite|improve this answer






















                • Awesome! Thanks for your help, does this lead to the answer "-ln(1-x) = at + C"?
                  – Hews
                  Aug 21 at 9:40










                • Yes. You probably want to turn it around and express $x$ in terms of $t$, and possibly rename the constant $e^-C$ to something else, as in this form has clearer meaning in the final function compared to just $C$.
                  – orion
                  Aug 21 at 9:45










                • @orion not possibly, but necessarily. Even if we consider complex values of $C$, there is a value $e^-C$ can’t reach, namely 0, but the corresponding solution, the constant function $x=1$, is very much a valid solution of the original equation.
                  – Roman Odaisky
                  Aug 21 at 15:33










                • @Hews Yes that is exactly right, but as other posters point out, you possible would prefer to rearrange into $x= ldots$
                  – Kevin
                  Aug 22 at 13:41










                • So to express x in terms of t, does it end as x = e^(at)e(-C) - 1?. Thanks for your help everyone!
                  – Hews
                  Aug 22 at 23:25












                up vote
                7
                down vote










                up vote
                7
                down vote









                If you are given, for $x=x(t)$
                $$fracdxdt = a(1-x)$$



                Then, one can re-arrange (by abuse of notation), giving
                beginalign
                fracdx1-x &= a, dt \
                implies int left(frac11-xright)dx &= a int dt
                endalign
                The right hand side is straightforward for you, the left requires some knowledge of standard integrals.



                Does this help?






                share|cite|improve this answer














                If you are given, for $x=x(t)$
                $$fracdxdt = a(1-x)$$



                Then, one can re-arrange (by abuse of notation), giving
                beginalign
                fracdx1-x &= a, dt \
                implies int left(frac11-xright)dx &= a int dt
                endalign
                The right hand side is straightforward for you, the left requires some knowledge of standard integrals.



                Does this help?







                share|cite|improve this answer














                share|cite|improve this answer



                share|cite|improve this answer








                edited Aug 21 at 12:01









                polfosol

                5,36731843




                5,36731843










                answered Aug 21 at 9:28









                Kevin

                5,158722




                5,158722











                • Awesome! Thanks for your help, does this lead to the answer "-ln(1-x) = at + C"?
                  – Hews
                  Aug 21 at 9:40










                • Yes. You probably want to turn it around and express $x$ in terms of $t$, and possibly rename the constant $e^-C$ to something else, as in this form has clearer meaning in the final function compared to just $C$.
                  – orion
                  Aug 21 at 9:45










                • @orion not possibly, but necessarily. Even if we consider complex values of $C$, there is a value $e^-C$ can’t reach, namely 0, but the corresponding solution, the constant function $x=1$, is very much a valid solution of the original equation.
                  – Roman Odaisky
                  Aug 21 at 15:33










                • @Hews Yes that is exactly right, but as other posters point out, you possible would prefer to rearrange into $x= ldots$
                  – Kevin
                  Aug 22 at 13:41










                • So to express x in terms of t, does it end as x = e^(at)e(-C) - 1?. Thanks for your help everyone!
                  – Hews
                  Aug 22 at 23:25
















                • Awesome! Thanks for your help, does this lead to the answer "-ln(1-x) = at + C"?
                  – Hews
                  Aug 21 at 9:40










                • Yes. You probably want to turn it around and express $x$ in terms of $t$, and possibly rename the constant $e^-C$ to something else, as in this form has clearer meaning in the final function compared to just $C$.
                  – orion
                  Aug 21 at 9:45










                • @orion not possibly, but necessarily. Even if we consider complex values of $C$, there is a value $e^-C$ can’t reach, namely 0, but the corresponding solution, the constant function $x=1$, is very much a valid solution of the original equation.
                  – Roman Odaisky
                  Aug 21 at 15:33










                • @Hews Yes that is exactly right, but as other posters point out, you possible would prefer to rearrange into $x= ldots$
                  – Kevin
                  Aug 22 at 13:41










                • So to express x in terms of t, does it end as x = e^(at)e(-C) - 1?. Thanks for your help everyone!
                  – Hews
                  Aug 22 at 23:25















                Awesome! Thanks for your help, does this lead to the answer "-ln(1-x) = at + C"?
                – Hews
                Aug 21 at 9:40




                Awesome! Thanks for your help, does this lead to the answer "-ln(1-x) = at + C"?
                – Hews
                Aug 21 at 9:40












                Yes. You probably want to turn it around and express $x$ in terms of $t$, and possibly rename the constant $e^-C$ to something else, as in this form has clearer meaning in the final function compared to just $C$.
                – orion
                Aug 21 at 9:45




                Yes. You probably want to turn it around and express $x$ in terms of $t$, and possibly rename the constant $e^-C$ to something else, as in this form has clearer meaning in the final function compared to just $C$.
                – orion
                Aug 21 at 9:45












                @orion not possibly, but necessarily. Even if we consider complex values of $C$, there is a value $e^-C$ can’t reach, namely 0, but the corresponding solution, the constant function $x=1$, is very much a valid solution of the original equation.
                – Roman Odaisky
                Aug 21 at 15:33




                @orion not possibly, but necessarily. Even if we consider complex values of $C$, there is a value $e^-C$ can’t reach, namely 0, but the corresponding solution, the constant function $x=1$, is very much a valid solution of the original equation.
                – Roman Odaisky
                Aug 21 at 15:33












                @Hews Yes that is exactly right, but as other posters point out, you possible would prefer to rearrange into $x= ldots$
                – Kevin
                Aug 22 at 13:41




                @Hews Yes that is exactly right, but as other posters point out, you possible would prefer to rearrange into $x= ldots$
                – Kevin
                Aug 22 at 13:41












                So to express x in terms of t, does it end as x = e^(at)e(-C) - 1?. Thanks for your help everyone!
                – Hews
                Aug 22 at 23:25




                So to express x in terms of t, does it end as x = e^(at)e(-C) - 1?. Thanks for your help everyone!
                – Hews
                Aug 22 at 23:25










                up vote
                3
                down vote













                You must write



                $$fracdx1-x=a dt$$






                share|cite|improve this answer
























                  up vote
                  3
                  down vote













                  You must write



                  $$fracdx1-x=a dt$$






                  share|cite|improve this answer






















                    up vote
                    3
                    down vote










                    up vote
                    3
                    down vote









                    You must write



                    $$fracdx1-x=a dt$$






                    share|cite|improve this answer












                    You must write



                    $$fracdx1-x=a dt$$







                    share|cite|improve this answer












                    share|cite|improve this answer



                    share|cite|improve this answer










                    answered Aug 21 at 9:28









                    Dr. Sonnhard Graubner

                    69k32761




                    69k32761




















                        up vote
                        2
                        down vote













                        If you write it as $dx = a(1-x)dt$ then it would be correct to integrate $x$ with respect to $t$. The trouble is, to perform the integration correctly, you would need to know what the dependence of $x$ on $t$ is, which is what you're trying to find out in the first place. To see what the problem with $int xdt =xt+C$ is, consider any function, e.g. $x=t$. If we substitute $t$ in for $x$ before integrating, we get $int tdt =frac t^22+C$. But if we use $int xdt =xt+C$ and substitute $t$ in for $x$ afterwards, we get $int xdt =t^2+C$, which is off by a factor of 2. Or if $x = sin(t)$, then we would have $int sin(t)dt=tsin(t)+C$ instead of $int sin(t)dt = cos(t)+C$. If we had that $int f(t)dt =tf(t)+C$, that would make the whole concept of an integral rather trivial; the integral of any function would just be that function times the independent variable. The identity $int xdt=xt+C$ works only if $x$ doesn't depend on $t$. Remember, an integral can be interpreted as the area under a curve. If $x$ is a constant, then we just have a rectangle with width $t$ and height $x$, so the area is $xt$. But if $x$ is varying with $t$, then we can't just take the value of $x$ at the end of the interval; clearly the area is going to depend on what $x$ is doing in between.



                        Note that if you get familiar with basic differential forms, you should get to a point where you recognize that when the derivative is proportional to the function value, you have an exponential function. In this case, the differential equation is modified by a constant term. So if you take the test solution $x = c_1e^c_2t+c_3$, solve for the derivative in terms of $c_1$, $c_2$, and $c_3$, and then plug that into the differential equation, then you can solve for $c_1$, $c_2$, and $c_3$. Note that one degree of freedom will remain, since this is a first-order equation and no initial condition is given.






                        share|cite|improve this answer


























                          up vote
                          2
                          down vote













                          If you write it as $dx = a(1-x)dt$ then it would be correct to integrate $x$ with respect to $t$. The trouble is, to perform the integration correctly, you would need to know what the dependence of $x$ on $t$ is, which is what you're trying to find out in the first place. To see what the problem with $int xdt =xt+C$ is, consider any function, e.g. $x=t$. If we substitute $t$ in for $x$ before integrating, we get $int tdt =frac t^22+C$. But if we use $int xdt =xt+C$ and substitute $t$ in for $x$ afterwards, we get $int xdt =t^2+C$, which is off by a factor of 2. Or if $x = sin(t)$, then we would have $int sin(t)dt=tsin(t)+C$ instead of $int sin(t)dt = cos(t)+C$. If we had that $int f(t)dt =tf(t)+C$, that would make the whole concept of an integral rather trivial; the integral of any function would just be that function times the independent variable. The identity $int xdt=xt+C$ works only if $x$ doesn't depend on $t$. Remember, an integral can be interpreted as the area under a curve. If $x$ is a constant, then we just have a rectangle with width $t$ and height $x$, so the area is $xt$. But if $x$ is varying with $t$, then we can't just take the value of $x$ at the end of the interval; clearly the area is going to depend on what $x$ is doing in between.



                          Note that if you get familiar with basic differential forms, you should get to a point where you recognize that when the derivative is proportional to the function value, you have an exponential function. In this case, the differential equation is modified by a constant term. So if you take the test solution $x = c_1e^c_2t+c_3$, solve for the derivative in terms of $c_1$, $c_2$, and $c_3$, and then plug that into the differential equation, then you can solve for $c_1$, $c_2$, and $c_3$. Note that one degree of freedom will remain, since this is a first-order equation and no initial condition is given.






                          share|cite|improve this answer
























                            up vote
                            2
                            down vote










                            up vote
                            2
                            down vote









                            If you write it as $dx = a(1-x)dt$ then it would be correct to integrate $x$ with respect to $t$. The trouble is, to perform the integration correctly, you would need to know what the dependence of $x$ on $t$ is, which is what you're trying to find out in the first place. To see what the problem with $int xdt =xt+C$ is, consider any function, e.g. $x=t$. If we substitute $t$ in for $x$ before integrating, we get $int tdt =frac t^22+C$. But if we use $int xdt =xt+C$ and substitute $t$ in for $x$ afterwards, we get $int xdt =t^2+C$, which is off by a factor of 2. Or if $x = sin(t)$, then we would have $int sin(t)dt=tsin(t)+C$ instead of $int sin(t)dt = cos(t)+C$. If we had that $int f(t)dt =tf(t)+C$, that would make the whole concept of an integral rather trivial; the integral of any function would just be that function times the independent variable. The identity $int xdt=xt+C$ works only if $x$ doesn't depend on $t$. Remember, an integral can be interpreted as the area under a curve. If $x$ is a constant, then we just have a rectangle with width $t$ and height $x$, so the area is $xt$. But if $x$ is varying with $t$, then we can't just take the value of $x$ at the end of the interval; clearly the area is going to depend on what $x$ is doing in between.



                            Note that if you get familiar with basic differential forms, you should get to a point where you recognize that when the derivative is proportional to the function value, you have an exponential function. In this case, the differential equation is modified by a constant term. So if you take the test solution $x = c_1e^c_2t+c_3$, solve for the derivative in terms of $c_1$, $c_2$, and $c_3$, and then plug that into the differential equation, then you can solve for $c_1$, $c_2$, and $c_3$. Note that one degree of freedom will remain, since this is a first-order equation and no initial condition is given.






                            share|cite|improve this answer














                            If you write it as $dx = a(1-x)dt$ then it would be correct to integrate $x$ with respect to $t$. The trouble is, to perform the integration correctly, you would need to know what the dependence of $x$ on $t$ is, which is what you're trying to find out in the first place. To see what the problem with $int xdt =xt+C$ is, consider any function, e.g. $x=t$. If we substitute $t$ in for $x$ before integrating, we get $int tdt =frac t^22+C$. But if we use $int xdt =xt+C$ and substitute $t$ in for $x$ afterwards, we get $int xdt =t^2+C$, which is off by a factor of 2. Or if $x = sin(t)$, then we would have $int sin(t)dt=tsin(t)+C$ instead of $int sin(t)dt = cos(t)+C$. If we had that $int f(t)dt =tf(t)+C$, that would make the whole concept of an integral rather trivial; the integral of any function would just be that function times the independent variable. The identity $int xdt=xt+C$ works only if $x$ doesn't depend on $t$. Remember, an integral can be interpreted as the area under a curve. If $x$ is a constant, then we just have a rectangle with width $t$ and height $x$, so the area is $xt$. But if $x$ is varying with $t$, then we can't just take the value of $x$ at the end of the interval; clearly the area is going to depend on what $x$ is doing in between.



                            Note that if you get familiar with basic differential forms, you should get to a point where you recognize that when the derivative is proportional to the function value, you have an exponential function. In this case, the differential equation is modified by a constant term. So if you take the test solution $x = c_1e^c_2t+c_3$, solve for the derivative in terms of $c_1$, $c_2$, and $c_3$, and then plug that into the differential equation, then you can solve for $c_1$, $c_2$, and $c_3$. Note that one degree of freedom will remain, since this is a first-order equation and no initial condition is given.







                            share|cite|improve this answer














                            share|cite|improve this answer



                            share|cite|improve this answer








                            edited Aug 21 at 15:25

























                            answered Aug 21 at 15:20









                            Acccumulation

                            5,8442616




                            5,8442616



























                                 

                                draft saved


                                draft discarded















































                                 


                                draft saved


                                draft discarded














                                StackExchange.ready(
                                function ()
                                StackExchange.openid.initPostLogin('.new-post-login', 'https%3a%2f%2fmath.stackexchange.com%2fquestions%2f2889665%2fintegrating-linearly%23new-answer', 'question_page');

                                );

                                Post as a guest













































































                                Popular posts from this blog

                                How to check contact read email or not when send email to Individual?

                                Christian Cage

                                How to properly install USB display driver for Fresco Logic FL2000DX on Ubuntu?