What is the Order of Integration in a Double Integral?

Click For Summary
SUMMARY

The discussion centers on the order of integration in double integrals, specifically in the context of calculating the center of mass of a semicircular disk using polar coordinates. The equation presented, $$y_{cm} = \frac \rho m \int_{r=0}^R\int_{\theta=0}^\pi (r\sin \theta)rdrd\theta$$, is debated regarding its limits of integration and the variables involved. Participants conclude that while the formula is correct, the order of integration and the limits must be properly defined to avoid confusion. Fubini's theorem is referenced to clarify that the order of integration does not affect the result, provided the boundaries are correctly established.

PREREQUISITES
  • Understanding of double integrals and their applications in physics.
  • Familiarity with polar coordinates and their use in integration.
  • Knowledge of Fubini's theorem and its implications for integration order.
  • Basic concepts of center of mass calculations in physics.
NEXT STEPS
  • Study Fubini's theorem in depth to understand its applications in multiple integrals.
  • Learn about polar coordinates and their integration techniques in calculus.
  • Explore examples of calculating center of mass for various shapes using double integrals.
  • Practice problems involving the order of integration in double integrals to solidify understanding.
USEFUL FOR

Students and professionals in mathematics, physics, and engineering who are involved in calculus, particularly those focusing on integration techniques and applications in physical scenarios.

Chenkel
Messages
482
Reaction score
109
TL;DR
I'm trying to understand a strange integral in Chris McMullen's book "Essential Calculus-based PHYSICS"
Hello everyone!

I've been reading Mr. McMullen's book and took some curiosity in an equation on the cover art, it is as follows:$$y_{cm} = \frac \rho m \int_{r=0}^R\int_{\theta=0}^\pi (r\sin \theta)rdrd\theta$$I'm trying to understand what it means, firstly the limits of integration for the inner integral are theta, and we're integrating with respect to r; then on the outer integral, the limits of integration are r, and the variable we're integrating with respect to is theta. I'm used to the variable for the limits of integration matching the variable we're integrating with respect to, does this equation make sense to anyone? Let me know what you think, thank you!
 
  • Love
Likes   Reactions: Delta2
Physics news on Phys.org
It is the integral for finding the center of mass of a semicircular disk of uniform surface mass density ##\rho## using polar coordinates. The definition is ##y_{cm}=\frac{1}{m}\int y~dm.## An area element ##dm## is at ##y=r\sin\theta## and ##dm=\rho~dA=\rho(dr)(rd\theta)##. When all this is brought together into a double integral, the limits of integration are over a semicircle of radius ##R##.

Look in the book. This might be an example in the center of mass section.
 
  • Like
Likes   Reactions: Delta2, Lnewqban and Chenkel
kuruman said:
It is the integral for finding the center of mass of a semicircular disk of uniform surface mass density ##\rho## using polar coordinates. The definition is ##y_{cm}=\frac{1}{m}\int y~dm.## An area element ##dm## is at ##y=r\sin\theta## and ##dm=\rho~dA=\rho(dr)(rd\theta)##. When all this is brought together into a double integral, the limits of integration are over a semicircle of radius ##R##.

Look in the book. This might be an example in the center of mass section.

I worked out the problem mechanically by hand, however I find I'm still coming to terms with the theory behind the double integral. I found it wasn't possible to come to an answer when the variable in the limits of integration is not the same as the variable we're integrating with respect to, so the equation on the cover art is incorrect if I'm not mistaken. This is my work:$$y_{cm} = \frac \rho m \int_{\theta = 0}^{\pi} \int_{r=0}^R r^2\sin \theta drd\theta$$$$y_{cm} = \frac \rho m \int_{\theta = 0}^{\pi} \frac {r^3} 3 \sin \theta |_{r=0}^Rd\theta$$$$y_{cm} = \frac \rho m (- \frac {R^3} 3 \cos \theta) |_{\theta=0}^\pi$$$$y_{cm} = \frac \rho m \frac {2R^3} 3$$
 
  • Like
Likes   Reactions: Delta2 and vanhees71
Chenkel said:
I worked out the problem mechanically by hand, however I find I'm still coming to terms with the theory behind the double integral. I found it wasn't possible to come to an answer when the variable in the limits of integration is not the same as the variable we're integrating with respect to, so the equation on the cover art is incorrect if I'm not mistaken. This is my work:$$y_{cm} = \frac \rho m \int_{\theta = 0}^{\pi} \int_{r=0}^R r^2\sin \theta drd\theta$$$$y_{cm} = \frac \rho m \int_{\theta = 0}^{\pi} \frac {r^3} 3 \sin \theta |_{r=0}^Rd\theta$$$$y_{cm} = \frac \rho m (- \frac {R^3} 3 \cos \theta) |_{\theta=0}^\pi$$$$y_{cm} = \frac \rho m \frac {2R^3} 3$$
The formula on the cover is correct and you calculated the relevant integral correctly, just replace $$\rho=\frac{m}{\frac{\pi R^2}{2}}$$ and you get the correct result.
 
  • Like
Likes   Reactions: Lnewqban, vanhees71 and kuruman
Delta2 said:
The formula on the cover is correct and you calculated the relevant integral correctly, just replace $$\rho=\frac{m}{\frac{\pi R^2}{2}}$$ and you get the correct result.
That make sense to me. The only part that I might be a little semantic about is if the equation on the cover art is correct, for example, I believe the integral I used is not directly the same as the one on the cover art:

$$\frac \rho m \int_{r=0}^R\int_{\theta=0}^\pi (r\sin \theta)rdrd\theta \neq \frac \rho m \int_{\theta = 0}^{\pi} \int_{r=0}^R r^2\sin \theta drd\theta$$

Notice that one of the integrals has badly defined limits of integration.
 
Delta2 said:
The formula on the cover is correct and you calculated the relevant integral correctly, just replace $$\rho=\frac{m}{\frac{\pi R^2}{2}}$$ and you get the correct result.

I discovered we can also do the approach of distributing dr, so the equation on cover art may be correct:$$\int_{r=0}^R\int_{\theta=0}^\pi (r\sin\theta)rdrd\theta=\int_{r=0}^R(-\cos{\theta}r^2dr)|_{\theta=0}^\pi=\int_{r=0}^R(r^2dr + r^2dr)=\int_{r=0}^R2r^2dr$$
Is this a valid approach?
 
Last edited:
Just a heads up: I think typically you want to flip flop the order of the differentials to work from the inside out.
 
  • Like
Likes   Reactions: Chenkel
@Chenkel The order of integration doesn't matter in a double integral as there is Fubini's theorem
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Fubini's_theorem
But yes the order of integration (more specifically, the order at which the differentials are written) matters regarding the way the boundary of integration are written. Yes you are right that the first integral has boundaries of integration 0 to ##\pi## for ##r##, and from ##0## to ##R## for ##\theta## which simply isn't correct.
 
  • Like
Likes   Reactions: Lnewqban and Chenkel

Similar threads

  • · Replies 2 ·
Replies
2
Views
3K
  • · Replies 1 ·
Replies
1
Views
1K
  • · Replies 10 ·
Replies
10
Views
2K
  • · Replies 2 ·
Replies
2
Views
2K
  • · Replies 7 ·
Replies
7
Views
3K
Replies
3
Views
2K
Replies
1
Views
1K
Replies
5
Views
2K
  • · Replies 4 ·
Replies
4
Views
4K
Replies
6
Views
3K