MHB Dirichlet Problem on Sphere: Proving Mean Value of f

Click For Summary
The discussion centers on proving that the value of the solution to the Dirichlet problem on a sphere at the origin equals the average value of the boundary condition function f over the sphere's surface. By applying the divergence theorem, it is shown that the integral of the divergence of u over the volume of the sphere equals the integral of f over the surface. Since the divergence of u is zero within the sphere, this leads to the conclusion that the average value of f, denoted as ⟨f⟩_S, must equal the value of u at the origin. Thus, it is established that u(0,0,0) = ⟨f⟩_S. The proof effectively demonstrates the relationship between the solution at the center and the average of the boundary conditions.
Dustinsfl
Messages
2,217
Reaction score
5
For the Dirichlet problem on a sphere of radius a with the boundary condition
$$
u(a,\theta,\phi) = f(\theta,\phi),
$$
show that the value of $u$ at the origin $(r = 0)$ is equal to the average value of $f$ over the surface of the sphere.

I know that the max and min occur on the boundaries and that is because the origin is the mean value but I don't know how to show it is the mean value.
 
Physics news on Phys.org
Let $V$ be the volume of the sphere of radius $a$. Then, by the divergence theorem,\begin{align*}\int_V \nabla \cdot \mathbf{u}\, dV &= \int_{\partial V} \mathbf{u}\cdot \hat{\mathbf{n}}\, dA \\&= \int_S u(a,\theta,\phi)\, dA \\&= \int_S f(\theta,\phi)\, dA \\&= a^2 \int_S f(\theta,\phi)\, d\Omega \\&= a^2 \langle f \rangle_S\end{align*}where $\langle f \rangle_S = \frac{1}{4\pi}\int_S f(\theta,\phi)\, d\Omega$ is the average value of $f$ over the surface of the sphere. On the other hand, since $\nabla \cdot \mathbf{u} = 0$ in the interior of the sphere, we have\begin{align*}\int_V \nabla \cdot \mathbf{u}\, dV &= 0 \\\implies a^2 \langle f \rangle_S &= 0 \\\implies \langle f \rangle_S &= 0\end{align*}Therefore, the value of $u$ at the origin must be equal to the average value of $f$ over the surface of the sphere, i.e. $u(0,0,0) = \langle f \rangle_S$.
 
We all know the definition of n-dimensional topological manifold uses open sets and homeomorphisms onto the image as open set in ##\mathbb R^n##. It should be possible to reformulate the definition of n-dimensional topological manifold using closed sets on the manifold's topology and on ##\mathbb R^n## ? I'm positive for this. Perhaps the definition of smooth manifold would be problematic, though.

Similar threads

  • · Replies 4 ·
Replies
4
Views
2K
  • · Replies 2 ·
Replies
2
Views
2K
  • · Replies 6 ·
Replies
6
Views
2K
  • · Replies 1 ·
Replies
1
Views
3K
  • · Replies 2 ·
Replies
2
Views
1K
Replies
12
Views
4K
  • · Replies 4 ·
Replies
4
Views
2K
  • · Replies 1 ·
Replies
1
Views
2K
  • · Replies 1 ·
Replies
1
Views
1K