You are Here: Home >< Maths

# Laplace Transform watch

1. Hi,

How I would go about deriving the laplace transform for L[integral of f(t) from zero to t]?

I'm aware of how you derive something like L[df/dt] using the standard definition of the Laplace transform, but I can't make sense of this particular derivation!

Any help would be much appreciated! Thanks!
2. I'm not clear; is the problem that you have a derivation you don't understand, or that you need to find a derivation and can't work out how to do it?
3. (Original post by DFranklin)
I'm not clear; is the problem that you have a derivation you don't understand, or that you need to find a derivation and can't work out how to do it?
The actual question is 'Derive the following Laplace Transform L[integral f(t) from zero to t].

I'm unsure how to derive it, as you can't use the normal definition?

Sorry, I don't know how to use the fancy maths format on here!
4. (Original post by Bioluminescence1)
The actual question is 'Derive the following Laplace Transform L[integral f(t) from zero to t].

I'm unsure how to derive it, as you can't use the normal definition?

Sorry, I don't know how to use the fancy maths format on here!
Write then use integration by parts on the Laplace transform integral. And think about what is.
5. (Original post by atsruser)
Write then use integration by parts on the Laplace transform integral. And think about what is.
Sorry I'm not sure I get what you mean, could you expand please? (:
6. (Original post by Bioluminescence1)
Sorry I'm not sure I get what you mean, could you expand please? (:
It may be more straightforward to define F as above, differentiate both sides and then apply the Laplace transform. (It's tantamount to doing the same thing in the end.)
7. (Original post by RichE)
It may be more straightforward to define F as above, differentiate both sides and then apply the Laplace transform. (It's tantamount to doing the same thing in the end.)
Differentiate and not integrate? Why would you do that?
8. (Original post by Bioluminescence1)
Differentiate and not integrate? Why would you do that?
Did you try it? What did you get when you differentiated F(t) and then transformed your answer?
9. (Original post by Bioluminescence1)
Sorry I'm not sure I get what you mean, could you expand please? (:
First, do you know what result that you're trying to get to? If not, it'll probably help to look it up. Then, given the expression I wrote above:

1. We have

2. We have

3. What is ?

4. What is ?

5. How does that suggest that you perform the IBP, given the result that you want?
10. (Original post by Bioluminescence1)
Differentiate and not integrate? Why would you do that?
Well, if you know the relationship between the Laplace transform of f(x) and the transform of f'(x), let then since you know the relationship between the Laplace transform of g and that of g', and you know the laplace transform of g' is the laplace transform of f, you should be able to use this to find the laplace transform of g.

### Related university courses

TSR Support Team

We have a brilliant team of more than 60 Support Team members looking after discussions on The Student Room, helping to make it a fun, safe and useful place to hang out.

This forum is supported by:
Updated: January 9, 2017
Today on TSR

### Exam Jam 2018

Join thousands of students this half term

Poll
Useful resources

### Maths Forum posting guidelines

Not sure where to post? Read the updated guidelines here

### How to use LaTex

Writing equations the easy way

### Study habits of A* students

Top tips from students who have already aced their exams