$0=1$ through integrals?

129 Views Asked by At

Let's consider an indefinite integral

$$\int \frac{dx}{x\ln x}$$

It can be easily calculated to be $\ln(\ln x)+C$, e.g. via substitution $\ln x=t$ or directly from $\int\frac{f'(x)}{f(x)}dx=\ln|f(x)|+C$. So far so good.

But when integration by parts is employed: $u'=\frac{1}{x}$, $v=\frac{1}{\ln x}$, one gets

$$\int \frac{dx}{x\ln x}=1+\int \frac{dx}{x\ln x}$$

from which $0=1$. Even if we plug an arbitrary constant of integration in the r.h.s. of the last equality, we'll just get that $C$ should be $-1$ for the equality to be an identity (but in general the constant of integration can be put in at the very last step of integration; like here and here), and we'll still know nothing about the integral.

So, my question is: why does integration by parts fail in this case? Are there some assumptions not fulfilled that I have overseen here? An explanation that "it doesn't work so one has to use different methods" is no explanation.

1

There are 1 best solutions below

3
On

The problem is that you are not specifying specific boundaries of integration when integrating by parts. The constant $C$ on the left and right will not turn out to be the same when you do specify boundaries of integration.

Indefinite integrals as written do not specify a single function $f(x)$, rather they specify a whole family of functions of the form $\{f(x)+C: C \in \mathbb{R}\}$. Given any such function, $f(x)+C$, $f(x)+ C +1 = f(x) + (C+1) = f(x) + C'$ is also in the set, and thus is also equal to the "indefinite integral". That's why they are called "indefinite", because they don't specify any specific function.