Comments on: What to make “u” in integration by parts http://www.johndcook.com/blog/2008/02/28/what-to-make-u-in-integration-by-parts/ The blog of John D. Cook Sat, 11 Feb 2012 22:42:11 -0500 http://wordpress.org/?v=2.8.4 hourly 1 By: Chris http://www.johndcook.com/blog/2008/02/28/what-to-make-u-in-integration-by-parts/comment-page-1/#comment-77995 Chris Wed, 27 Apr 2011 10:42:37 +0000 http://www.johndcook.com/blog/2008/02/28/what-to-make-u-in-integration-by-parts/#comment-77995 Dear John Just in the interest of math education trivia (perhaps a better word is in order): I'm a Singaporean (you know... a dude, from Singapore.) We sit for a modified version of the A-levels (what they take over in England) and at least here teaching the LIATE schema is common. I am not too sure about England. Best Chris Dear John
Just in the interest of math education trivia (perhaps a better word is in order):
I’m a Singaporean (you know… a dude, from Singapore.) We sit for a modified version of the A-levels (what they take over in England) and at least here teaching the LIATE schema is common. I am not too sure about England.

Best
Chris

]]> By: John http://www.johndcook.com/blog/2008/02/28/what-to-make-u-in-integration-by-parts/comment-page-1/#comment-50432 John Tue, 02 Nov 2010 17:14:52 +0000 http://www.johndcook.com/blog/2008/02/28/what-to-make-u-in-integration-by-parts/#comment-50432 Glenn: Touché. I can be a grammar stickler too so I appreciate the tip. Glenn: Touché. I can be a grammar stickler too so I appreciate the tip.

]]> By: Glenn Decker http://www.johndcook.com/blog/2008/02/28/what-to-make-u-in-integration-by-parts/comment-page-1/#comment-50431 Glenn Decker Tue, 02 Nov 2010 17:11:39 +0000 http://www.johndcook.com/blog/2008/02/28/what-to-make-u-in-integration-by-parts/#comment-50431 Stumbled upon your web page, looks like some useful tips to be found here. But I must say you're guilty of misappropriating the term "begging the question" which is a formal logical fallacy whereby the conclusion of an argument is assumed in the premises. You meant "raises the question". Just my grammar nazi contribution of the day. GD Stumbled upon your web page, looks like some useful tips to be found here. But I must say you’re guilty of misappropriating the term “begging the question” which is a formal logical fallacy whereby the conclusion of an argument is assumed in the premises. You meant “raises the question”. Just my grammar nazi contribution of the day. GD

]]> By: Dave Richeson http://www.johndcook.com/blog/2008/02/28/what-to-make-u-in-integration-by-parts/comment-page-1/#comment-31461 Dave Richeson Sun, 24 Jan 2010 16:32:40 +0000 http://www.johndcook.com/blog/2008/02/28/what-to-make-u-in-integration-by-parts/#comment-31461 My students taught me this 8ish years ago. They remembered it with the mnemonic L.I.A.T.E. My students taught me this 8ish years ago. They remembered it with the mnemonic L.I.A.T.E.

]]> By: Ryan http://www.johndcook.com/blog/2008/02/28/what-to-make-u-in-integration-by-parts/comment-page-1/#comment-25072 Ryan Fri, 25 Sep 2009 06:12:39 +0000 http://www.johndcook.com/blog/2008/02/28/what-to-make-u-in-integration-by-parts/#comment-25072 That's really interesting. The trick I always use is, let dv be the function that has the cleanest antiderivative such that the order does not increase (unless using the "invisible dv") I love this part of Calculus 2. A nice taxonomy of integration tricks, and integration by parts has its own corner cases such as using "I" and the "invisible dv" where dv = dx. That’s really interesting. The trick I always use is, let dv be the function that has the cleanest antiderivative such that the order does not increase (unless using the “invisible dv”)

I love this part of Calculus 2. A nice taxonomy of integration tricks, and integration by parts has its own corner cases such as using “I” and the “invisible dv” where dv = dx.

]]>