Parametric Surfaces and Their Areas

Click For Summary

Discussion Overview

The discussion revolves around the concept of parametric representations of planes in three-dimensional space, specifically addressing the validity of different vector representations for the same plane. Participants explore the implications of using different parameter labels and their effects on the resulting parametric equations.

Discussion Character

  • Exploratory
  • Technical explanation
  • Conceptual clarification
  • Debate/contested

Main Points Raised

  • One participant presents a problem from a calculus text regarding the parametric representation of a plane and questions the validity of using different vectors for the same plane.
  • Another participant asserts that the two representations are equivalent, emphasizing that the parameters (u, v) are just dummy variables and do not affect the plane's identity.
  • A participant expresses confusion about the equivalence of different parameterizations and seeks clarification on the relationship between the parameters and the representation of the plane.
  • Further contributions reinforce the idea that the choice of parameter labels is arbitrary and does not change the underlying geometric object being described.
  • Examples are provided to illustrate that different parameterizations can describe the same mathematical object, such as lines or integrals, without altering their fundamental properties.

Areas of Agreement / Disagreement

Participants generally agree that different parameterizations can represent the same plane, but there is some confusion regarding the implications of this equivalence and the role of parameter labels.

Contextual Notes

Some participants express uncertainty about the implications of parameterization and the significance of the order of parameters, indicating a need for further clarification on these concepts.

Who May Find This Useful

Readers interested in multivariable calculus, particularly those studying parametric surfaces and their representations, may find this discussion relevant.

wubie
[SOLVED] Parametric Surfaces and Their Areas

Hello,

I am having problems visualizing a concept. First I will post my question as it is given in Jame's Stewart's Fourth Edition Multivariable Calculus text, Chapter 17, section 6, question 17.

Find a parametric representation for the given surface.

(a) The plane that passes through the point (1,2,-3) and contains the two vectors i + j + - k and i - j + k .

Now I know that vector representation in the solution can be written as

r(u,v) = rsub0 + ua + vb

where a = i + j + - k and b = i - j + k which becomes

r(u,v) = <1,2,-3> + u<1,1,-1> + v<1,-1,1>

which would produce parametric equations

x = 1 + u + v,
y = 2 + u -v,
z = -3 -u + v.

But what I am wondering what if I let a = i - j + k and b = i + j + - k . Then I would have

r(u,v) = <1,2,-3> + u<1,-1,1> + v<1,1,-1>

which would produce different parametric equations than the first.

x = 1 + u + v,
y = 2 - u + v,
z = -3 + u - v.

Now intuitively I think this is just as valid as the first. Is it though?

Any help / input is appreciated. Thankyou.

I'm back and the more I think about it and fool around with it I believe it is not possible to have two vector equations representing a plane with the above criteria. If that is the case then how do I determine which vector is multiplied by the parameter u and which vector is multiplied by the parameter v? This is the part that is confusing me.
 
Last edited by a moderator:
Physics news on Phys.org
u and v are just dummy (free) variables. the two planes are the same.

Perhaps it's easier to see:

just take the x,y plane itself, in R^2

then all points on it can be described as the set {(u,v) | u,v in R} and is equally the set {(s,t) | s,t in R} and hence, {(v,u) | v,u in R}

nothing special going on.
 
I think I know what you are saying, but I am not following

then all points on it can be described as the set {(u,v) | u,v in R} and is equally the set {(s,t) | s,t in R} and hence, {(v,u) | v,u in R}

Particularly when you go from

is equally the set {(s,t) | s,t in R} and hence, {(v,u) | v,u in R}

Usually it is the simplest things that stump me. Over thinking too much perhaps? I don't know.
 
The two planes are the same just like these two lines are the same:
[tex]\underline{u} = (1, 2, 3) + \alpha (4, 5, 6)[/tex]
[tex]\underline{v} = (5, 7, 9) + \beta (8, 10, 12)[/tex]
When you combine two vectors linearly to form a surface, the scalar coefficients can take absolutely any value and they have no special meaning...
 
To echo Chen, the u,v,s,t are just parameters free to roam over any (real) value. The labels have no intrinsic meanings.take the even numbers, then it is the set of all objects, s where s=2t for some integer t. I picked those labels at random and could have equally put them in the other order. It isn't important as long as you don't mix things...

another example:

the definite integral from 0 to 1 of f(x)dx is the same as if we did it for f(y)dy, or f(s)ds...
 

Similar threads

  • · Replies 1 ·
Replies
1
Views
3K
  • · Replies 4 ·
Replies
4
Views
2K
  • · Replies 5 ·
Replies
5
Views
2K
  • · Replies 1 ·
Replies
1
Views
2K
  • · Replies 5 ·
Replies
5
Views
4K
  • · Replies 2 ·
Replies
2
Views
3K
  • · Replies 6 ·
Replies
6
Views
2K
  • · Replies 7 ·
Replies
7
Views
1K
  • · Replies 3 ·
Replies
3
Views
2K
  • · Replies 3 ·
Replies
3
Views
4K