Integrate with explicit integration variable/infetesimal...

Stavros Macrakis wrote:
> that matter integrate(3) would mean.  Am I alone in always having been
> confused by the Leibniz notation?  It looks so pretty for the chain
> rule, for separation of variables solutions of differential equations,
> and for integration by parts, but I've never been comfortable with it.
>  Perhaps non-standard analysis makes all this clear?

I agree that I'm not entirely sure what the /non-clean/ forms would me. 
  But in my case I'm fairly positive there is a reduced form where 
everything looks fine, it's just that I don't know how to find it -- I 
started the thread on substitution in order to find another way to 
approach the problem.

I tried looking for some place that would explain these things more, but 
I couldn't find any reference. :(

-- 
edA-qa mort-ora-y
Idea Architect
http://disemia.com/