Timeline for Why is differentiating mechanics and integration art?
Current License: CC BY-SA 3.0
5 events
| when toggle format | what | by | license | comment | |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Oct 31, 2013 at 0:49 | comment | added | O.R. | I think this is the only answer that really touches on the ways of seeing why integration is harder than differentiation. This question cannot be answered by showing how easy is differentiation and how hard or even hard to define integration is. Specially if the functions to be treated are written already in ways that are easy for the derivative to treat. In a sense, we are giving (assuming) the input of the derivative already in a way that it is easy to compute. | |
| Oct 2, 2012 at 18:59 | history | edited | Peter Michor | CC BY-SA 3.0 |
added 119 characters in body
|
| Oct 2, 2012 at 17:58 | history | edited | Peter Michor | CC BY-SA 3.0 |
Answer to a comment.
|
| Oct 2, 2012 at 17:32 | comment | added | Noah Stein | Can you expand on this? You seem to be saying that with respect to the right "basis" integration could be made routine, behaving in a similar way to how differentiation behaves on elementary functions. Is the difficulty that you'd also need to replace basic operations such as composition with some less natural/common counterparts? | |
| Oct 2, 2012 at 13:26 | history | answered | Peter Michor | CC BY-SA 3.0 |