Evaluating line integrals versus Green's Theorem

Click For Summary

Homework Help Overview

The problem involves evaluating a line integral and applying Green's Theorem to a simple closed path defined by straight line segments from the origin to (0,1), then to (1,0), and back to the origin. The integrand is given as (x+xy-y)(dx+dy).

Discussion Character

  • Mixed

Approaches and Questions Raised

  • Participants discuss the evaluation of the line integral and the application of Green's Theorem, noting discrepancies in the integration boundaries and the expressions for partial derivatives. There is an exploration of the relationship between the two methods and the expected equality of results.

Discussion Status

The discussion is active, with participants questioning the correctness of the integration limits and the expressions used in the calculations. Some guidance has been offered regarding the boundaries of integration, but there is no explicit consensus on the correct approach or final results.

Contextual Notes

Participants note potential errors in the setup of the problem, including misinterpretations of the boundaries and the definitions of the functions involved. There is an acknowledgment of the need to clarify these aspects to ensure accurate evaluations.

theno1katzman
Messages
21
Reaction score
0

Homework Statement



Find the simple closed integral of (x+xy-y)(dx+dy) counterclockwise around the path of straight line segments from the origin to (0,1) to (1,0) to the origin...
a)as a line integral
b)using green's theorem

Homework Equations



Eq of line segment r(t)=(1-t)r0+tr1

Greens Theorem states that Integral of Pdx+Qdy on a closed simple path will equal the double integral or area of dQ/dx-dP/dy (see the work I did)

The Attempt at a Solution



See the pictures. The two were supposed to be equal, I just needed to show how to arrive at the same answer using both methods. The triangle shows the graph of the path, horizontal is x axis, vertical is y axis. The C2 on the left of the triangle should say C3, sorry. Also the first integral should read (1+y) not (1-y)
 

Attachments

  • 82a.jpg
    82a.jpg
    19.4 KB · Views: 540
  • 82b.jpg
    82b.jpg
    14.5 KB · Views: 510
Last edited:
Physics news on Phys.org
One obvious error is in saying that
\frac{\partial Q}{\partial x}= 1- y
Q= x+ xy- y so
\frac{\partial Q}{\partial x}= 1+ y

but it is written correctly in the next line so that's not the problem.

I notice you then integrate, in integrating over the area,
\int_{y=0}^{-x}
Why is that? The upper boundary is y= x, not y= -x. It looks to me like you should be integrating 2x+ x^2/2- x^2= 2x- x^2/2 with respect to x. That would give \left[x^2- x^3/6\right]_0^1= 5/6 rather than -1/2.
 
Last edited by a moderator:
But that wouldn't give you the same answer for part a and b...
Why would that give y=x for the boundary. I looked it over again with my calculator, that upper boundary line (hypotenuse) is y=-x+1
however integrating that you end up with 2, which is still not the same as part a.
 
theno1katzman said:
But that wouldn't give you the same answer for part a and b...
Why would that give y=x for the boundary. I looked it over again with my calculator, that upper boundary line (hypotenuse) is y=-x+1
however integrating that you end up with 2, which is still not the same as part a.
Yes, you are right about that- I misread your problem.

But, still, the integral should be from 0 to 1- x, not to just -x.
 

Similar threads

Replies
3
Views
2K
  • · Replies 10 ·
Replies
10
Views
2K
Replies
12
Views
2K
  • · Replies 3 ·
Replies
3
Views
2K
Replies
12
Views
5K
  • · Replies 1 ·
Replies
1
Views
2K
  • · Replies 4 ·
Replies
4
Views
2K
Replies
6
Views
3K
  • · Replies 2 ·
Replies
2
Views
2K
  • · Replies 2 ·
Replies
2
Views
2K