Get our expert's

answer on brainly

SEE EXPERT ANSWER

Get your **free** account and access **expert** answers to this and **thousands** of other questions.

I got my questions answered at brainly.com in under 10 minutes. Go to brainly.com now for free help!

I don't think you can use u-sub here. cuz then it'd be f(u) = u*sinu..

and i haven't learned trig sub or integration by parts yet.

jenny you are a liar i think

-_-
i haven't.
but i can do integration by parts. but my teacher never taught it.

becos that problem required fresnal integral

what?

Use \(u = x^2\). Then \(x = \sqrt{u}\)

u can use u sub on that

\[f(x) = x^2\sin(x^2) \]

if u = x^2 then du = 2xdx

well what method are you allowed to use if you can't use trig or parts

that's what i don't understand.
u-sub doesn't really work...

so ur on u-sub section of the book?

no it's a review packet. i learned area, u-sub, trapezoid rule, and simpson's rule

thats the way it is

not an exponent

no it's
\[f(x) = x^2\sin(x^2)\]

This isn't a candidate for u sub.

u = x^2
du = 2x dx cant use u du sub

no place to apply a substitution

\[
\frac{1}{2}\int \sqrt{u}\sin(u)du
\]Isn't helpful.

|dw:1357267172296:dw|

-_-
it was in the textbook in the chapter 5. we don't do trig sub/parts until chapter 8...

whats the name of the textbook

although i know how to do parts but my teacher never taught it.

stewart

7th edition?

5th

which chapter section?

chapter 5 review #49

fresnal function is introduced in section 5.3

lol wolframalpha? xD

haha same
5.3 is fundemental theorum

go to 5.3 examlpe number 3

we don't use stewart. we use larson. my teacher just photocopied this from the stewart textbook

thats illegail

but u gonna have to look up fresnal function elsewhere then

she owns like ten stewart textbooks.
-_-
i'll just use parts then...

wait let me rewrite that

\[F(x) = \int\limits\limits_{1}^{x} t ^{2} \sin(t ^{2}) dt\]

That way when it is evaluated at F(1), you still get 0. And the derivative is the original function.

oh wow. thanks @LogicalApple
that's the answer in the book
-___-

yes but i never thought of it that way...
*sigh*

Stewart doesn't mess around.. I'm in chapter 5 on the 7th edition.

oh same here i think.
my teacher uses both stewart and larson. we teach from larson.

I will have to check that one out. Anyway good luck with your studies!

thanks :)

I think it's sort of an unfair question. Should have specified a bit more the rigor.

i guess it just makes u think about the concept more?

If they said something like "in terms of an indefinite integral" then it would have been fair.