This post is inspired by my rereading a favorite book of mine: Underwood Dudley’s *Mathematical Cranks*

There was the chapter about the circumference of an ellipse. Now, given it isn’t hard to see that and so going with the portion in the first quadrant: one can derive that the circumference is given by the elliptic integral of the second kind, which is one of those integrals that can NOT be solved in “closed form” by anti-differentiation of elementary functions.

There are lots of integrals like this; e. g. is a very famous example. Here is a good, accessible paper on the subject of non-elementary integrals (by Marchisotto and Zakeri).

So this gets me thinking: why is anti-differentiation so much harder than taking the derivative? Is this because of the functions that we’ve chosen to represent the “elementary anti-derivatives”?

I know; this is not a well formulated question; but it has always bugged me. Oh yes, I am teaching two sections of first semester calculus this upcoming semester.

### Like this:

Like Loading...

*Related*

I don’t know if you frequent MathSE, but just in case you missed it: https://math.stackexchange.com/questions/20578/why-is-integration-so-much-harder-than-differentiation .

Comment by Spinor — August 18, 2014 @ 2:37 pm

Thank you. I’ve read the responses and it is my guess that it has something to do with the collection of functions that we consider “elementary”. The comments about numerical differentiation and integration were interesting as well.

Comment by blueollie — August 18, 2014 @ 6:28 pm