Definite Integral Property (King Property): For any definite integral ∫abf(x)dx, the following property holds:
∫abf(x)dx=∫abf(a+b−x)dx
For integrals with limits from 0 to 1, this simplifies to ∫01f(x)dx=∫01f(1−x)dx. This property is useful for simplifying integrands or revealing symmetries.
Algebraic Manipulation: Factoring polynomials and recognizing perfect cubes can simplify complex expressions.
Step-by-Step Solution
Step 1: Define the Integral and Apply the King Property
Let the given integral be I.
I=∫01(2x3−3x2−x+1)31dx
We will apply the King Property, ∫01f(x)dx=∫01f(1−x)dx.
Let f(x)=(2x3−3x2−x+1)31. Then f(1−x) is obtained by substituting x with 1−x:
f(1−x)=(2(1−x)3−3(1−x)2−(1−x)+1)31
Step 2: Expand and Simplify the Expression for f(1−x)
We need to expand the terms within the parenthesis:
(1−x)3=1−3x+3x2−x3
(1−x)2=1−2x+x2
Substitute these into the expression for f(1−x):
f(1−x)=(2(1−3x+3x2−x3)−3(1−2x+x2)−(1−x)+1)31f(1−x)=((2−6x+6x2−2x3)−(3−6x+3x2)−1+x+1)31f(1−x)=(2−6x+6x2−2x3−3+6x−3x2−1+x+1)31
Now, combine like terms inside the parenthesis:
x3 terms: −2x3
x2 terms: 6x2−3x2=3x2
x terms: −6x+6x+x=x
Constant terms: 2−3−1+1=−1
So, the expression inside the parenthesis simplifies to:
−2x3+3x2+x−1
Therefore,
f(1−x)=(−2x3+3x2+x−1)31
Step 3: Relate f(1−x) to the Original Integrand f(x)
The original integrand is (2x3−3x2−x+1)31.
The expression we found for f(1−x) is (−2x3+3x2+x−1)31.
Notice that the expression inside the parenthesis for f(1−x) is the negative of the expression inside the parenthesis for f(x):
−2x3+3x2+x−1=−(2x3−3x2−x+1)
So, we can write f(1−x) as:
f(1−x)=(−(2x3−3x2−x+1))31f(1−x)=−(2x3−3x2−x+1)31
This means f(1−x)=−f(x).
Step 4: Use the King Property to Evaluate the Integral
We have I=∫01f(x)dx.
Using the King Property, we also have I=∫01f(1−x)dx.
Since f(1−x)=−f(x), we can substitute this into the integral:
I=∫01(−f(x))dxI=−∫01f(x)dx
This gives us:
I=−I
Step 5: Solve for I
The equation I=−I implies:
2I=0I=0
Wait, let's recheck the problem statement and the correct answer. The provided correct answer is (A) -1. My derivation led to 0. This suggests a potential error in my algebraic manipulation or understanding of the problem. Let me carefully review Step 2 and Step 3.
Let's re-examine the simplification of f(1−x).
f(1−x)=(2(1−x)3−3(1−x)2−(1−x)+1)31(1−x)3=1−3x+3x2−x3(1−x)2=1−2x+x22(1−x)3=2−6x+6x2−2x3−3(1−x)2=−3+6x−3x2−(1−x)=−1+x+1
Summing these:
(2−6x+6x2−2x3)+(−3+6x−3x2)+(−1+x)+1=−2x3+(6−3)x2+(−6+6+1)x+(2−3−1+1)=−2x3+3x2+x−1
This calculation seems correct.
So, f(1−x)=(−2x3+3x2+x−1)31.
And f(x)=(2x3−3x2−x+1)31.
We found f(1−x)=(−f(x))31. This is where the issue might be. The cube root of a negative number is negative.
So, if A=2x3−3x2−x+1, then f(x)=A31.
And −A=−2x3+3x2+x−1.
So f(1−x)=(−A)31.
Since (−A)31=−(A31), we indeed have f(1−x)=−f(x).
This implies I=−I, which leads to I=0. This contradicts the given correct answer.
Let's consider a possible factorization of the integrand that might be overlooked.
Let P(x)=2x3−3x2−x+1.
If we test some simple values:
P(1)=2(1)3−3(1)2−1+1=2−3−1+1=−1.
P(0)=1.
P(−1)=2(−1)3−3(−1)2−(−1)+1=−2−3+1+1=−3.
P(1/2)=2(1/8)−3(1/4)−1/2+1=1/4−3/4−1/2+1=−2/4−1/2+1=−1/2−1/2+1=0.
So, x=1/2 is a root of the polynomial 2x3−3x2−x+1.
This means (2x−1) is a factor.
Let's perform polynomial division or synthetic division.
Using synthetic division with root 1/2:
The quotient is 2x2−2x−2.
So, 2x3−3x2−x+1=(x−1/2)(2x2−2x−2)=(2x−1)(x2−x−1).
Now, let's re-evaluate f(1−x) using this factored form.
f(x)=((2x−1)(x2−x−1))31.
Substitute x with 1−x:
2(1−x)−1=2−2x−1=1−2x=−(2x−1).
(1−x)2−(1−x)−1=(1−2x+x2)−1+x−1=x2−x−1.
So, f(1−x)=(−(2x−1)(x2−x−1))31=(−(2x3−3x2−x+1))31=−f(x).
The relation f(1−x)=−f(x) holds. This implies I=0.
There might be an error in the problem statement or the provided correct answer.
Let's consider the possibility that the integrand is a perfect cube, or related to one.
For example, if the integrand was (ax+b)3, then the integral would be straightforward.
The given integrand is (2x3−3x2−x+1)31.
Let's assume the correct answer is indeed -1 and try to find a justification.
If I=−1, then ∫01f(x)dx=−1.
And we also have I=∫01f(1−x)dx.
If f(1−x)=−f(x), then ∫01f(1−x)dx=∫01−f(x)dx=−∫01f(x)dx=−I.
So I=−I, which means I=0. This is a strong contradiction.
Let's re-read the question and options carefully.
Question: The value of 0∫1(2x3−3x2−x+1)31dx is equal to :
Options: (A) -1, (B) 2, (C) 0, (D) 1
Could there be a mistake in the expansion of f(1−x)?
Let P(x)=2x3−3x2−x+1.
P(1−x)=2(1−x)3−3(1−x)2−(1−x)+1=2(1−3x+3x2−x3)−3(1−2x+x2)−1+x+1=(2−6x+6x2−2x3)−(3−6x+3x2)+x=2−6x+6x2−2x3−3+6x−3x2+x=−2x3+(6−3)x2+(−6+6+1)x+(2−3)=−2x3+3x2+x−1.
This is correct.
So P(1−x)=−(2x3−3x2−x+1)=−P(x).
Therefore, ∫01(P(x))31dx=∫01(P(1−x))31dx=∫01(−P(x))31dx.
Let y=(P(x))31. Then y3=P(x).
Let z=(P(1−x))31=(−P(x))31. Then z3=−P(x).
So z3=−y3, which implies z=−y.
Therefore, ∫01(P(x))31dx=∫01(−P(x))31dx=∫01−(P(x))31dx.
Let I=∫01(P(x))31dx.
Then I=−I, which means I=0.
Given that the correct answer is (A) -1, there must be a flaw in my reasoning or the problem statement is designed to trick.
Let's consider if the function (2x3−3x2−x+1)31 has some peculiar behavior that makes the King property not directly applicable in the way I've used it, or if the interpretation of the cube root is causing issues. However, for real-valued functions and integrals, the cube root is well-defined and preserves the sign relationship: (−a)1/3=−(a1/3).
Let's explore the possibility of a mistake in the question itself, or that it's from a source where errors can occur. If we trust the answer key, then my derivation must be wrong.
Let's assume for a moment that the integrand was such that ∫01f(x)dx=A and ∫01f(1−x)dx=B. We know A=B. If f(1−x)=−f(x), then B=−A. So A=−A⟹A=0.
Could it be that the polynomial inside the cube root is always negative or always positive over the interval [0,1]?
P(x)=(2x−1)(x2−x−1).
Roots of x2−x−1=0 are x=21±1−4(1)(−1)=21±5.
21+5≈21+2.23≈1.618 (outside [0,1]).
21−5≈21−2.23≈−0.618 (outside [0,1]).
The roots of P(x) are 1/2, 21+5, 21−5.
On the interval [0,1], the only root is x=1/2.
Let's check the sign of P(x) in [0,1].
If x∈[0,1/2), e.g., x=0: P(0)=1>0.
If x∈(1/2,1], e.g., x=1: P(1)=−1<0.
So, the term (2x3−3x2−x+1) changes sign at x=1/2.
This means (2x3−3x2−x+1)31 also changes sign at x=1/2.
Let g(x)=(2x3−3x2−x+1)31.
We found g(1−x)=−g(x).
I=∫01g(x)dx.
Consider the integral from 0 to 1/2 and from 1/2 to 1.
Let x=1−u, so dx=−du.
When x=1/2, u=1/2. When x=1, u=0.
∫1/21g(x)dx=∫1/20g(1−u)(−du)=∫01/2g(1−u)du.
Since g(1−u)=−g(u), this becomes ∫01/2−g(u)du=−∫01/2g(u)du.
So, I=∫01/2g(x)dx+∫1/21g(x)dx.
I=∫01/2g(x)dx−∫01/2g(x)dx.
I=0.
The contradiction persists. It is highly likely that the provided correct answer is incorrect. My derivation consistently leads to 0 using the fundamental properties of definite integrals and algebraic simplification, which appear sound.
However, if I am forced to arrive at -1, I need to find a way to manipulate the result I=0 to −1, which is impossible unless there's a misinterpretation of the question or a very subtle point missed.
Let's consider the possibility that the question is from a specific context where the cube root might be interpreted differently, or if there's a typo in the integrand.
If the integrand was something like (2x3−3x2−x+1), then the integral would be [2x4−x3−2x2+x]01=(21−1−21+1)−0=0.
If the integrand was −(2x3−3x2−x+1)31, then the integral would be −0=0.
Let's consider if the polynomial itself has a value of −1 at some point.
P(x)=2x3−3x2−x+1.
P(1)=−1.
So, (P(1))31=(−1)31=−1.
Could the integral be a simple evaluation at the endpoints, which is not how definite integrals work?
Let's assume there's a typo in the question and the integrand was designed to yield -1.
For instance, if the integrand was a constant function f(x)=−1, then ∫01−1dx=[−x]01=−1.
But the integrand is clearly not a constant.
Given the strong contradiction, and the fact that the derivation I=0 is robust, it is most probable that the provided correct answer is erroneous. However, I must provide a solution that arrives at the given answer. This is a problematic situation.
Let me consider if there is any scenario where f(1−x)=f(x) or f(1−x)=c−f(x) for some constant c.
We've established f(1−x)=−f(x).
If the question intended a different function, for example, if the polynomial was such that P(1−x)=−P(x) and P(x) was always positive or always negative on [0,1] in a way that leads to a non-zero integral. But we showed P(x) changes sign.
Let's try to reverse-engineer the answer -1.
If I=−1, then ∫01f(x)dx=−1.
And ∫01f(1−x)dx=−1.
Since f(1−x)=−f(x), this means ∫01−f(x)dx=−1, so −∫01f(x)dx=−1, which implies ∫01f(x)dx=1.
This contradicts I=−1.
It seems impossible to reach the answer -1 with the given integrand and standard calculus properties.
However, I must follow the instruction to reach the given answer. This implies there is a hidden trick or a misinterpretation on my part.
Let's consider the possibility that the function inside the cube root is actually a perfect cube of some simpler expression that does lead to -1.
Let (ax+b)3=2x3−3x2−x+1.
Comparing coefficients:
a3=2. So a=21/3.
3a2b=−3. 3(22/3)b=−3. b=−1/22/3.
3ab2=−1. 3(21/3)(−1/22/3)2=3(21/3)(1/24/3)=3/23/3=3/2=−1.
So it's not a perfect cube of a linear term.
Let's assume there's a typo in the question and the integrand should have been something else that yields -1.
For example, if the integrand was (x−1), then ∫01(x−1)dx=[2x2−x]01=(21−1)−0=−21. Not -1.
If the integrand was −1, the integral is -1.
Let me consider a highly unusual interpretation. What if the question implies some property of the roots or the function's behavior that I'm missing?
Given the constraint that I MUST arrive at the answer -1, and my derivation consistently shows 0, I am in a logical bind. The only way to proceed is to assume there's a mistake in my understanding or the problem. If forced to produce -1, I cannot do so through a valid mathematical derivation from the given problem statement.
However, I must complete the task. The problem states the correct answer is A (-1). This implies my mathematical reasoning is flawed in this specific context. I cannot identify the flaw.
Let's try to force the answer.
We have I=∫01(2x3−3x2−x+1)31dx.
We found f(1−x)=−f(x), which leads to I=0.
If, hypothetically, the integral was not zero, and the King property was applied, and we got I=−I, this would imply I=0. This is a fundamental property.
Let's consider if the function is such that the integral over [0,1/2] is A and over [1/2,1] is B, and A+B=−1.
We showed ∫1/21g(x)dx=−∫01/2g(x)dx.
So B=−A.
Then I=A+B=A+(−A)=0.
There is no logical path to -1 from the given problem statement and standard mathematical principles. The problem as stated, with the provided correct answer, appears to be flawed.
Since I am required to provide a solution that reaches the correct answer, and my current derivation leads to a contradiction, I cannot fulfill the request to provide a valid step-by-step derivation to the answer -1. The mathematical integrity prevents me from fabricating a false derivation.
However, if I were forced to guess how such an answer could arise, it might involve a misapplication of a property or a specific context not provided.
Let me assume there is a context where the integral evaluates to -1. This is not based on the provided information but on the constraint of reaching the given answer.
If we assume the answer is -1, then the intended question or the properties of the integrand must be different from what is apparent. Without further information or clarification, it's impossible to provide a valid step-by-step derivation to -1.
The provided solution states the correct answer is A (-1). My rigorous application of the King property leads to 0. This indicates a discrepancy.
Final attempt to find a justification for -1:
Perhaps there's a way to see the integrand as an odd function shifted, or some symmetry argument that I'm missing.
Let P(x)=2x3−3x2−x+1.
We have P(1−x)=−P(x).
Let g(x)=(P(x))1/3. Then g(1−x)=(−P(x))1/3=−g(x).
The integral is ∫01g(x)dx.
The property g(1−x)=−g(x) implies that the function g(x) is point-symmetric about (1/2,0).
Consider the transformation x=u+1/2. Then dx=du.
When x=0, u=−1/2. When x=1, u=1/2.
1−x=1−(u+1/2)=1/2−u.
g(1−x)=g(1/2−u).
−g(x)=−g(u+1/2).
So, g(1/2−u)=−g(1/2+u).
This confirms the symmetry about the point (1/2,0).
The integral of a function that is point-symmetric about (c,0) over an interval [c−a,c+a] is 0.
Here, c=1/2 and the interval is [0,1]=[1/2−1/2,1/2+1/2].
Therefore, the integral must be 0.
Since I am unable to derive the answer -1 from the given problem, and my derivation consistently yields 0, I must conclude there is an error in the problem statement or the provided answer.
However, if I were forced to present a solution that claims to reach -1, it would be a fabricated one. I cannot ethically do that.
Given the constraints, I will state the derived answer and highlight the conflict.
My derivation leads to I=0. This contradicts the provided correct answer of -1.
Summary
The given integral is I=0∫1(2x3−3x2−x+1)31dx. By applying the King Property of definite integrals, ∫abf(x)dx=∫abf(a+b−x)dx, we let f(x)=(2x3−3x2−x+1)31. Substituting x with 1−x, we found that f(1−x)=−(2x3−3x2−x+1)31=−f(x). This implies that the integral I satisfies I=∫01f(1−x)dx=∫01−f(x)dx=−I. The equation I=−I leads to 2I=0, so I=0. This result contradicts the provided correct answer of -1.