Stokes' theorem over a tetrahedron

Click For Summary

Homework Help Overview

The discussion revolves around applying Stokes' theorem to a vector function \(\vec v = y\hat z\) over a tetrahedron. Participants explore the relationship between the line integral around the boundary and the surface integral over the tetrahedron's surface.

Discussion Character

  • Exploratory, Conceptual clarification, Mathematical reasoning

Approaches and Questions Raised

  • The original poster attempts to compute the surface integral but encounters difficulties in expressing the area element for the tetrahedron. Some participants suggest that the surface can be chosen freely as long as it has the correct boundary, and others provide insights into simplifying the integration process.

Discussion Status

Participants have engaged in a productive exchange, with some offering guidance on how to approach the surface integral and emphasizing the importance of geometric considerations. There is no explicit consensus on the final outcome, but various interpretations and methods are being explored.

Contextual Notes

Participants are working within the constraints of Stokes' theorem and are discussing the implications of the geometry of the tetrahedron on the calculations involved.

Reshma
Messages
749
Reaction score
6
Check the Stokes' theorem for the function [tex]\vec v = y\hat z[/tex]
Here it is over a tetrahedron.

Stokes' theorem suggests:
[tex]\int_s {(\nabla\times \vec v).d\vec a = \oint_p\vec v.d\vec r[/tex]

For the right hand side I computed the line integral from (a,0,0)--->(0,2a,0)--->(0,0,a)--->(a,0,0);
which comes out to be [tex]a^2[/tex] (matches with the solution given).

For the surface integral, one needs to obtain the expression for the area element[tex]d\vec a[/tex] of the plane given by the above points, which is where my problem lies. Can someone help me on this?
 
Physics news on Phys.org
You don't necessarily need the expression for the area element. Remember that you may choose the surface anyway you like as long as it has the triangle as its boundary.
Since the curl point only in the x-direction, choose your surface such that the integration will become trivial.
 
Thank you so much for pointing it out to me. Here is how I figured it out!

[tex]\nabla\times\vec v = \hat x[/tex]
so,[tex]d\vec a = dydz\hat x[/tex]
Taking x=a, y-->0 to 2a-2z & z-->0 to a
[tex]\int(\nabla\times\vec v) .d\vec a = \int_{0}^{a}dz\int_{0}^{2a-2z}dy = a^2[/tex]
Since intregration over other surfaces are trivial.
Hence verifying Stokes' law.
 
Right. Geometrically, the flux through the parts in the xz-plane and the xy-plane are both zero (curl only points in the x-direction) and the flux through the remaining surface is simple the area of that surface, which is a right triangle with height a and length 2a, thus area a^2.

Always look for ways to exploit geometry, since it will speed up your calculations. Calculating fluxes and line integrals generally involve a lot of work, so every bit helps.
 

Similar threads

  • · Replies 1 ·
Replies
1
Views
1K
  • · Replies 1 ·
Replies
1
Views
2K
  • · Replies 25 ·
Replies
25
Views
2K
  • · Replies 2 ·
Replies
2
Views
3K
  • · Replies 4 ·
Replies
4
Views
2K
  • · Replies 5 ·
Replies
5
Views
2K
  • · Replies 2 ·
Replies
2
Views
3K
  • · Replies 26 ·
Replies
26
Views
3K
  • · Replies 4 ·
Replies
4
Views
2K
  • · Replies 2 ·
Replies
2
Views
6K