A question about path independence and curl of a vector field

Click For Summary

Discussion Overview

The discussion centers on the relationship between the curl of a vector field and path independence, exploring conditions under which a vector field may not be path independent despite having a zero curl. Participants examine theoretical implications, mathematical examples, and the role of continuity and singularities in vector fields.

Discussion Character

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

Main Points Raised

  • Some participants assert that a zero curl indicates path independence, but others highlight exceptions, particularly in the presence of singularities.
  • One participant mentions that continuity requirements may be necessary for the statement about curl and path independence to hold true, referencing Stokes' Theorem.
  • A participant provides an example of a 2-D point vortex where the curl is zero everywhere, yet the circulation around the singularity is non-zero, illustrating a case where path independence fails.
  • Another participant emphasizes that the path of integration must lie within a simply connected region for the relationship between curl and path independence to be valid.
  • One participant introduces the concept of exact differentials, noting that these yield the same integral over any path between two points, contrasting with closed differentials that have a zero curl but may not be exact in non-simply connected regions.
  • There is a mention of how removing points from a plane affects the number of closed differentials that fail to be exact, linking the discussion to topology and de Rham cohomology.

Areas of Agreement / Disagreement

Participants express differing views on the conditions necessary for path independence in relation to curl, with no consensus reached on the implications of singularities or the requirements for continuity and simply connected regions.

Contextual Notes

The discussion highlights limitations related to the assumptions about continuity and the definitions of simply connected regions, as well as the implications of singularities in vector fields. These factors remain unresolved within the conversation.

harsh
Messages
76
Reaction score
0
If the curl of a vector field is zero, then we can that the vector field is path independent. But there are cases where this is not true, I was wondering how?
Whats the explanation for this? Thanks in advance for any help.

- harsh
 
Physics news on Phys.org
There may be continuity requirements for the field to make the statement absolutely true (from memory it follows from Stokes' Theorem). However, in any physically well-behaved system, that will usually be true.
 
If you've got a singularity in your velocity field, the quantity "curl" (i.e, local angular velocity) might be zero everywhere in the domain, yet the circulation around the singularity might still be non-zero.
As an examle, consider the velocity field associated with a 2-D point vortex:
[tex]\vec{v}(r,\theta)=\frac{\Gamma}{2\pi{r}}\vec{i}_{\theta}[/tex]
The curl is then:
[tex]\nabla\times\vec{v}=\vec{i}_{r}\times\frac{\partial}{\partial{r}}(\frac{\Gamma}{2\pi{r}}\vec{i}_{\theta})+\vec{i}_{\theta}\times\frac{1}{r}\frac{\partial}{\partial{\theta}}(\frac{\Gamma}{2\pi{r}}\vec{i}_{\theta})=-\frac{\Gamma}{2\pi{r}^{2}}(\vec{i}_{r}\times\vec{i}_{\theta}+\vec{i}_{\theta}\times\vec{i}_{r})=\vec{0}[/tex]

However, the circulation on a (circular) path of radius R containing the origin is:
[tex]C=\int_{0}^{2\pi}\vec{v}\cdot\vec{i}_{\theta}Rd\theta=\Gamma[/tex]

The interpretation is as follows:
Place a small paddlewheel with a vertical pole in it some distance from the vortex (the origin). The paddle-wheel will of course circle about the origin, BUT IT WILL NOT ROTATE ABOUT ITS OWN AXIS, due to zero curl..
 
Last edited:
I believe this is usually stated by saying that the path along which you integrate must all be within simply connected region in which the vector function is continuous with continuous first derivatives.
A region is simply connected if any loop you can form in it can be 'capped' by a plane which does not leave the region.
 
the simplest example (and the simplest way to describe it) is dtheta, the angle form about the orign.

here is an answer to the same question from another thread. (if they post multiple questions, i hope i may be forgiven for posting multiple answers.)

there is a special class of integrals, i.e. differential forms, that DO give the same integral over any path joining the same two points. these are called "exact" differentials, and are precisely those of form df for some function in that region, i.e. a gradient.

another related concept is of a "closed" differential, one such that its curl is zero. these are in fact the same as the exact differentials in any "simply connected" region.


thus to measure how far a region is from being simply connected, one can ask how many closed differentials in it fail to be exact.

for example, if we remove n points from the plane, there will still be exactly an n dimensional vector space of closed forms in that region, after we consider all exact forms to be zero.

\this measuring device is a big tool in topology called derham cohomology.

work done by gravity for example is exact so does not depend on the path taken by the object.
 

Similar threads

  • · Replies 20 ·
Replies
20
Views
5K
  • · Replies 1 ·
Replies
1
Views
3K
  • · Replies 7 ·
Replies
7
Views
3K
  • · Replies 3 ·
Replies
3
Views
2K
Replies
3
Views
1K
  • · Replies 10 ·
Replies
10
Views
3K
  • · Replies 5 ·
Replies
5
Views
2K
  • · Replies 5 ·
Replies
5
Views
2K
  • · Replies 2 ·
Replies
2
Views
4K