Why can't I get Stoke's Theorem to Work ?

In summary, the conversation discussed a problem involving Stoke's Theorem and a 3-4-5 right triangle with a defined field \vec{u}=x^2\hat{x} + xy\hat{y}. The person was struggling with evaluating the integral \oint{\vec{u}d\vec{l}} and \oint{(\nabla{}x\vec{u}) . \hat{n} dA}. They received a hint to carefully look at the limits of the surface integral and were able to solve the problem correctly.
  • #1
Orson1981
15
0
Why can't I get Stoke's Theorem to Work!?

Homework Statement


This is very similar to the problem I put up last night actually part c of the same problem. I really have put an amazing amount of time into this problem (week and a half/ 5 hrs a day) and it countinues to stump me. At this point I'm spinning mental wheels and could use some help.

we have a 3-4-5 right triangle lying on the x-y plane with the length three side on the x-axis and the length 4 side on the y-axis. we define a field
[tex]\vec{u}=x^2\hat{x} + xy\hat{y}[/tex]

and I am trying to evaluate the integral:

[tex]\oint{\vec{u}d\vec{l}}[/tex]


Homework Equations



I need to solve both:

[tex]\oint{\vec{u}d\vec{l}}[/tex]

and

[tex]\oint{(\nabla{}x\vec{u}) . \hat{n} dA}[/tex]
please excuse my clumsy notation, this should be del cross the vector u


The Attempt at a Solution



The surface integral after doing del cross u I end up with

[tex]\frac {1}{2} \oint{ y \hat{k} dxdy} [/tex]
evaluated from 0 - 3 on the x-axis and 0 - 4 on the y-axis
Doing this I get 12.
the 1/2 I added into this equation is largely a guess on my part, and could be correct or not, just seemed to make some sense for a triagle who's area is 1/2 base*height

Looking at the line integral

I placed curve 1 along the y-axis from 4 - 0 then paramaterized x = 0 and dx = 0
so for curve 1 is zero

Curve 2, I paramaterized y = 0, dy = 0 that left

[tex]\int{x^2 dx}[/tex] evaluated from 0 - 3 gives me 9

Curve 3 along the hypotinous (I can't spell ... sorry) paramaterized y = 4 - 4/3 * x dy = -3/4 * dx
plugging these new values into y and dy and integrating from 3 - 0 gives me -1

So for the whole curve I have 8

So somewhere I missed something because last I checked 8 =! 12, or if you ignore my guess of 1/2 in the surface integral 8 =! 24
so I'm only off by a factor of 3 somewhere, though it could be coincidence that's a pretty nice number to be off by, makes me think I'm just missing a term somewhere.
If I had to guess I would say somehow [tex] \hat{n} [/tex] is somehow equal to 1/3, or perhaps 1/6 to include my guess about 1/2 in the surface integral


Thank you for reading this long rambling thing, and thanks for any help

-Mo
 
Physics news on Phys.org
  • #2
I believe your line integrals are all correct [though you have a typo: dy = -(4/3)dx, not -(3/4)dx].

But your surface integral is wrong. You can't just multiply by a factor of one half. You need to integrate y over the area of the triangle. This integral takes the form

[tex]\int_a^b dx \int_c^d dy \; y[/tex]

where you need to figure out what the limits a, b, c, and d should be so that you are covering the triangle. Key point: c and d may depend on x.

When I do this integral with the correct limits, I get 8, matching your result from the line integrals.
 
  • #3
Thank you!, armed with your hint I went back and 'carefully' looked at one of my undergrad math books I'm using as a reference, and of course there it was staring me in the face the whole time, but until you came along I was just to dense to see it.

and thank you for not giving me the answer, and letting me work it out myself.

I kinda feel bad, because I know these are such easy questions I'm throwing out and I should know this stuff, but I'm stoked now, I can do integrals - Awesome.
 
  • #4
Glad to help. The easy stuff is sometimes the hardest to see when you're in the middle of a problem.
 

Related to Why can't I get Stoke's Theorem to Work ?

1. Why isn't Stoke's Theorem working for my problem?

There could be several reasons why Stoke's Theorem is not working for your specific problem. It is important to carefully check your calculations and make sure all the necessary conditions for applying the theorem are met.

2. What are the necessary conditions for applying Stoke's Theorem?

In order for Stoke's Theorem to be applicable, the surface must be closed and bounded by a simple, smooth curve. The vector field must also be continuous and have continuous partial derivatives over the surface.

3. How can I check if my surface is closed and bounded by a simple, smooth curve?

You can visually inspect the surface or use mathematical tools such as the divergence theorem to determine if the surface satisfies these conditions. It is also helpful to draw a diagram of the surface to better understand its boundaries and curvature.

4. Can Stoke's Theorem be applied to any vector field?

No, the vector field must also satisfy certain conditions for Stoke's Theorem to be applicable. The field must be conservative, meaning that it can be expressed as the gradient of a scalar function. Additionally, the field must be continuous and have continuous partial derivatives over the surface.

5. Are there any alternative theorems that can be used if Stoke's Theorem does not work?

Yes, if Stoke's Theorem does not apply to your problem, you may be able to use the Divergence Theorem or Green's Theorem instead. These theorems have similar concepts but different conditions for their applicability. It is important to carefully consider the problem and choose the appropriate theorem for the given scenario.

Similar threads

  • Calculus and Beyond Homework Help
Replies
10
Views
478
  • Calculus and Beyond Homework Help
Replies
20
Views
481
  • Calculus and Beyond Homework Help
Replies
3
Views
1K
  • Calculus and Beyond Homework Help
Replies
4
Views
827
  • Calculus and Beyond Homework Help
Replies
3
Views
317
  • Calculus and Beyond Homework Help
Replies
6
Views
1K
  • Calculus and Beyond Homework Help
Replies
1
Views
51
Replies
3
Views
1K
  • Calculus and Beyond Homework Help
Replies
1
Views
615
  • Calculus and Beyond Homework Help
Replies
4
Views
1K
Back
Top