You have one mistake which occurs when you integrate . The antiderivative of this is not in terms of . Instead, letting (or , if you want to bother with more signs) gives , making the indefinite integral equality
and then compute the definite integral from there.
Or, starting from the beginning, you could also have found it slightly more convenient to combine the substitutions in one fell swoop by letting . Then , and the integral becomes
Another way to do this is to notice that the integrand's denominator can be factorized.
So,
There are no discontinuities to worry about since you're integrate over , so you can proceed with integrating straightaway.
Just goes to show there's often more than one way to skin a cat...
When you put something in parenthesis by a number, your multiplying each individual number by the number outside of parenthesis. Therefore, 5(2) = 10 and 5(7) = 35 and that equals 45, and 5(2+7) you distribute the 5 to both numbers and get 10+35 which equals 45 aswell.
Given the table below which lists the masses and volumes of several pieces of the same type of metal.<span>
From the table the ratio of the mass to the volume of the metal of mass 34.932 is 34.932 / 4.1 = 8.52 </span><span>the ratio of the mass to the volume of the metal of mass 47.712 is 47.712 / 5.6 = 8.52 </span><span>the ratio of the mass to the volume of the metal of mass 61.344 is 61.344 / 7.2 = 8.52 </span><span><span>the ratio of the mass to the volume of the metal of mass 99.684 is 99.684 / 11.7 = 8.52
Since the ratio of the various masses to the volume of the metals is the same, so there is a relationship between the mass and the volume of the piece of metal.
If the volume of a piece of metal is 15.3 cubic cm, then the mass of the metal is given by 15.3 * 8.52 = 130.356 grams.