Trouble converting Cartesian to Polar

  • Context: Undergrad 
  • Thread starter Thread starter longbusy
  • Start date Start date
  • Tags Tags
    Cartesian Polar
Click For Summary

Discussion Overview

The discussion revolves around the challenges of converting Cartesian coordinates to polar coordinates, particularly in the context of calculus and integration. Participants share their experiences and seek advice on understanding and applying these concepts in various mathematical problems.

Discussion Character

  • Exploratory
  • Technical explanation
  • Homework-related
  • Mathematical reasoning

Main Points Raised

  • Some participants express difficulty in thinking in polar coordinates compared to Cartesian coordinates, noting a lack of familiarity with the former.
  • One participant mentions that while converting simple equations like circles is straightforward, more complex scenarios lead to confusion.
  • Another participant suggests that practice and familiarity with polar coordinates will eventually make the concepts clearer, especially when dealing with integrals.
  • There is a discussion about the specifics of substitution in integrals, including the application of the chain rule and the Jacobian for changing variables in multiple integrals.
  • Participants explore the bounds of integration for a double integral in polar coordinates, with one participant struggling to determine the correct limits based on given inequalities.
  • There is a correction regarding the use of cylindrical versus polar coordinates, with participants clarifying the appropriate forms for their equations.
  • One participant questions the reasoning behind the bounds provided in a textbook, leading to further exploration of the inequalities involved.

Areas of Agreement / Disagreement

Participants generally agree on the challenges of converting between coordinate systems and the importance of practice. However, there are multiple competing views on the specifics of substitution and the determination of integration bounds, indicating that the discussion remains unresolved in these areas.

Contextual Notes

Some participants express uncertainty about the limits of integration and the conversion of equations into polar form, highlighting the complexity of the problems being discussed. There are also references to specific mathematical operations and concepts that may not be universally understood among all participants.

Who May Find This Useful

Students and individuals studying calculus, particularly those encountering difficulties with coordinate transformations and integration in polar coordinates.

longbusy
Messages
19
Reaction score
0
Well, it is not really hard to convert them. My main problem is thinking in Polar coordinates. Cartesian coordinates are really easy to think about for me (after how many years of experience) but then I get to Calc 3 and I hit a brick wall. Does anyone have some insight on how to get past this problem?

Thanks in advance!
-Jeremy

i.e.

x^2 + y^2 = 9 gives a cylinder of radius 3 in 3-D

the same equation is r = 3, right? That's pretty simple, but once it gets more complicated Boom, I'm lost.
 
Physics news on Phys.org
Ellipse (center at origin, axes of ellipse along coordinate axes)

(x^2/a^2) + (y^2/b^2) = 1

Where a and b are the two semi-axes.

Hyperbola (similar conditions)

(x^2/a^2) - (y^2/b^2) = 1

Parabola (vertex at origin, axis along y-axis opening up)

y = ax^2
 
Originally posted by longbusy
Does anyone have some insight on how to get past this problem?

Just lots of practice to get familiar with them, just keep tredging through it and do your homework and after a while it will all start making sense. In fact for many problems the polar, or spherical coordinate systems will be come your coordinates of choice because they make many things much much simpler. Have you gotten to the change of variables topic yet in calc 3? If not, you'll see what I mean once you get there, many integrals are much easier to perform in sperical or cylindrical coordinates rather then in cartesian.
 
Actually, the substitution part is what we're working on right now. That is why I asked the question. It's killing me. :) I'll just keep trudging. Thanks!
 
Well, substitution can mean different things... which operation gives you trouble when substituting?


Can you apply the chain rule for differentiation when substitutions are involved? e.g.:

Letting @ be the symbol for partial differentiation:

@f/@r = @f/@x * @x/@r + @f/@y * @y/@r
= cos &theta * @f/@x + sin &theta * @f/@y


Did you understand substitution in integrals in calc 2? i.e.:

&int sqrt(1 - x^2) dx = &int sqrt(1 - (sin &theta)^2) cos &theta d&theta = ...

and by understand I mean that you could replace all occurances of one variable with the other (x -> sin &theta) in the integral, compute the equation for replacing the differential (dx = cos &theta d&theta), and you could compute the new bounds for your integral if it happened to be a definite integral.


Do you understand how to perform substitution in a multiple integral, meaning you can both replace the variables and the differentials? E.G.

via Jacobian:
x = r cos &theta, y = r sin &theta
dx dy = J(x, y / r, &theta) dr d&theta
Code:
 = det /@x/@r   @x/@&theta\ dr d&theta
       \@y/@r   @y/@&theta/
 = det /cos &theta   -r sin &theta\ dr d&theta
       \sin &theta    r cos &theta/
= (r (cos &theta)^2 + r (sin &theta)^2) dr d&theta
= r dr d&theta

or via algebra: (I'm lazy so I won't compute things, just label 'em with capital variables)
dx dy = (@x/@r dr + @x/@&theta d&theta) * (@y/@r dr + @y/@&theta d&theta)
= A dr dr + B dr d&theta + C d&theta dr + D d&theta d&theta
= 0 + B dr d&theta - C dr d&theta + 0
= (B - C) dr d&theta = r dr d&theta


Do you understand how to recompute the limits of integration in a multiple integral, or equivalently being able to translate a description of a region in one set of coordinates into another set of coordinates? e.g. going from:

x^2 + y^2 <= 9

to

r <= 3 and 0 <= &theta <= 2&pi


Hurkyl
 
Hurkyl, thanks, I am working through some topics you listed now. I did well in Calc 2 with the substitution. It is just stuff like the following:

"Use a double integral in polar coordinates to find the volume of the solid that is described."

x^2 + y^2 + z^2 = 9 (inside)
x^2 + y^2 = 1 (outside)

The surface is a circle with a cylinder through it (duh). I know I want the area from the cylinder wall out to the edge of the circle. I know that the lower bound for r will be 1. But the upper bound of r and the bounds for theta are kind of beyond me at the moment.

Though, I am working these a little easier now.
 
So the description of your volume is:

x^2 + y^2 > 1
x^2 + y^2 + z^2 < 9


Are you having trouble simple converting these equations into polar form, or can you get that far and just have trouble figuring out what the bounds of integration are?

Hurkyl
 
I am mainly having trouble figuring out the bounds. I can draw the pictures and see them. I cannot figure out the bounds. That is what is holding me up.
 
Originally posted by longbusy "Use a double integral in polar coordinates to find the volume of the solid that is described."

x^2 + y^2 + z^2 = 9 (inside)
x^2 + y^2 = 1 (outside)

Hmmm, OK, let me try.

x = r cos[psi] cos[the]
y = r sin[psi] cos[the]
z = r sin[the]

I. r^2 < 9
II. r^2 cos^2[the] > 1, or r^2 > 1/cos^2[the]

dV = r^2 cos [the] dr d[the] d[psi]
V = Int [0 ; 2[pi]] Int [-[pi]/2 ; [pi]/2] cos [the] Int [1/cos^2[the] ; 9] r^2 dr d[the] d[psi]

OK so far?
 
Last edited:
  • #10
Correction.

My Theta limits are wrong. We've got to keep 1/cos^2[the] smaller than 9, which means
1/cos^2[the] < 9
cos^2[the] > 1/9
|[the]| < arccos 1/3

So, should read Int [-arccos 1/3 ; arccos 1/3] ... d[the]
 
  • #11
Well, it's in polar coordinates, not cylindrical... But I assume those are correct. What I calculated:

r^2 = 9 - 9cos^2(theta)
-or-
r = 3 - 3cos(theta)

Now, the book claims that the bounds are:

8Int[0, pi/2]Int[1,3]...(dr)(d(theta))

I understand the first bounds (eight quadrants for the full circle), but why is it Int[1,3] for r?

Thanks for all your help!
 
  • #12
There are only 4 quadrants in the full circle (I imagine the extra factor of 2 was pulled from inside the integral to outside).


As for the bounds on r, go back to the inequalities I listed:

x^2 + y^2 > 1 (outside the cylinder)
x^2 + y^2 + z^2 < 9 (inside the sphere)

Convert those to cylindrical coordinates (cylindrical coordinates are the same thing as polar coordinates, just with z as a third coordinate) and you might see where the bounds on r come from! (If not, show me what you got as the result from converting both equations and I'll go from there)

Hurkyl
 
  • #13
I meant octants, not quadrants. Sorry! That explains the 8.

In cyclindrical coordinates, I got the following for x^2 + y^2 + z^2 = 9:

r^2 = 9 - 9cos^2(theta)
-or-
r = 3 - 3cos(theta)

So, r goes from 1 to 3 - 3cos(theta) right?

Thanks a lot for your help, I know I am being a bit dense.
 
  • #14
Where are you getting cos theta? z should just remain z when you do the conversion

Hurkyl
 
  • #15
Mixing up Spherical with Cylindrical for some reason. So it should remian r^2 + z^2 = 9?
 
  • #16
Right, it should remain r^2 + z^2 < 9 (don't forget the inequality; it specifies you care about the interior of the sphere rather than just its surface. More complicated problems can be made a little easier if you don't forget this)

From this inequality, you can find the largest possible value of r (which is 3 when z = 0), and then once you have your bounds on r you can solve for z to get the bounds on it.

Hurkyl
 
  • #17
Thanks! I am working on a lot more of these problems now. Better safe than sorry. I just cannot understand why only Odd answers are given in supplemental answer books. If professors do collect homework, work has to be shown... Just doesn't make sense. :)

Thanks again!
 
  • #18
one of these should be a symbol for partial differencation

delta &delta;
Delta &Delta;
 
  • #19
actually it's this one [pard]
 

Similar threads

  • · Replies 2 ·
Replies
2
Views
4K
  • · Replies 8 ·
Replies
8
Views
2K
  • · Replies 7 ·
Replies
7
Views
3K
  • · Replies 12 ·
Replies
12
Views
2K
  • · Replies 2 ·
Replies
2
Views
2K
  • · Replies 1 ·
Replies
1
Views
2K
  • · Replies 3 ·
Replies
3
Views
2K
  • · Replies 4 ·
Replies
4
Views
4K
  • · Replies 3 ·
Replies
3
Views
2K
  • · Replies 47 ·
2
Replies
47
Views
7K