My Math Forum  

Go Back   My Math Forum > Math Forums > Math

Math General Math Forum - For general math related discussion and news

LinkBack Thread Tools Display Modes
August 11th, 2016, 05:57 PM   #11
Math Team
Joined: Dec 2013
From: Colombia

Posts: 7,675
Thanks: 2655

Math Focus: Mainly analysis and algebra
Originally Posted by EvanJ View Post
Call the antiderivative at one point Q1 + C and the antiderivative at another point Q2 + C. To calculate the area under the curve in between the value of x that produced Q1 and the value of x that produced Q2, the area = (Q2 + C) - (Q1 + C).
One problem with this approach is that without defining definite integrals in terms of the area under a curve (usually via Riemann sums) and the Fundamental Theorem of Calculus, you have no justification for calling that quantity the area under the curve. This is a serious flaw when "the area under the curve" has such a strong natural meaning that we can verify answers against (given the right tools).
v8archie is offline  
August 24th, 2016, 06:37 AM   #12
Senior Member
Joined: Dec 2012
From: Hong Kong

Posts: 853
Thanks: 311

Math Focus: Stochastic processes, statistical inference, data mining, computational linguistics
In Hong Kong, Riemann summation is not usually taught until the first course in analysis. Teachers tend to start from indefinite integration, then teach the Fundamental Theorem of Calculus without proof.
123qwerty is offline  
August 24th, 2016, 08:20 AM   #13
Senior Member
Joined: Jun 2015
From: England

Posts: 915
Thanks: 271

One thing forgotten by most teachers is that

They are (I hope) familiar with the subject and its ramifications and development, whilst students are not.

So looking at it from the point of view of a student, everything is new and unfamiliar.
This doesn't apply only to calculus, it is pretty general.

So when new material is presented the student glosses over much of the subtlety to get some much needed experience under his belt.

When I first learned calculus both differentiation (first) and later integration were presented as limits.

Then we quickly moved on in both cases to get familiarity with some examples / manipulation.

This provided both comfort and motivation for pursuing the subject.

Then still later the formal development of both procedures was revisited and connected.

I don't think it really matters which comes first.
studiot is offline  
August 24th, 2016, 08:26 AM   #14
Joined: Aug 2016
From: Viet Nam

Posts: 1
Thanks: 0

I think 1 is better. Despite the fact that i was first introduced to integration as in 2
blogtoancom is offline  
August 24th, 2016, 12:06 PM   #15
Joined: Jul 2016
From: Switzerland

Posts: 4
Thanks: 2

Math Focus: graph theory
I was also introduced using method 2. I remember my teacher back then made us cut pieces of paper and try to fill an arbitrary shape with ever smaller pieces. Then we moved through the successive theorems up to the fundamental integral theorem. I think we saw only later the application of the integral as inverse of the derivative, or maybe in parrallel as exercises.

I think if you go with method 2 first, you have to present things through an application in geometry or physics else the students won't relate.
CoarxFlow is offline  
September 9th, 2016, 07:17 AM   #16
Senior Member
Joined: Aug 2016
From: morocco

Posts: 273
Thanks: 32

The best way to teach integration is to start by historic introduction : archimedes, Newton, Leibnitz, Cauchy and Riemann.
abdallahhammam is offline  

  My Math Forum > Math Forums > Math

antiderivative, area, curve

Thread Tools
Display Modes

Similar Threads
Thread Thread Starter Forum Replies Last Post
Area under P-h curve? philip Physics 0 February 12th, 2014 05:22 AM
area under a curve ehh Calculus 11 January 27th, 2013 07:53 PM
Area under curve Ter Calculus 6 October 8th, 2012 10:50 AM
area under curve forgot_it_all Calculus 1 October 28th, 2010 09:53 PM
area under the curve Aurica Calculus 1 May 23rd, 2009 10:40 AM

Copyright © 2019 My Math Forum. All rights reserved.