Generalization of Surface Integral

In summary, the surface integral of a function in three dimensions can be generalized to more dimensions by using the absolute value of the Jacobian determinant. The cross product in three dimensions is a special case of this generalization. This can be extended to k-dimensional parametrized-manifolds in R^n, where the k-dimensional volume is defined using the derivative of the parametrized function. The notation dV is used to denote the integral with respect to volume.
  • #1
schaefera
208
0
Given that a surface integral of a function, f(x,y,z), is written as [itex]\int\int f(x,y,z) dS[/itex] where dS= |df/dx x df/dy| dA, how can this be generalized into more dimensions? In other words, is it possible to find a way to convert dS into a differential piece of area for more than 3 dimensions? What type of cross product would be able to incorporate the cross product of something differentiated with respect to three parameters, or four, or so on?
 
Physics news on Phys.org
  • #2
Hi schaefera! :smile:

What you write is a bit ambiguous.

It should be something like:
[tex]\iint_S f(x,y,z) dS = \iint_S f(\phi(u,v)) ~ \left|\frac {\partial \phi} {\partial u} \times \frac {\partial \phi} {\partial v}\right| ~ du~dv[/tex]
where [itex]\phi(u,v)[/itex] is a function that maps (u,v) to points (x,y,z) on the surface S.

For n dimensions this is generalized using the absolute value of the Jacobian determinant.
Your cross product is a special case for 3 dimensions that happens to be the same.

See for instance: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Integration_by_substitution#Substitution_for_multiple_variables

The formula shown in the article is:
ad029d8d434531623748cfbb7310ee90.png
 
Last edited:
  • #3
Ok, I believe I understand that (although I have to admit it's a bit beyond what I have studied)! My one remaining question is: why is the cross product in the 3D version a special case of the Jacobian determinant? Because the parameterized function relies on two variables, wouldn't the Jacobian be a 2x3 matrix (the top row being the partials with respect to u and the second row being the partials with respect to v)? I'm obviously missing something, but how do you get the determinant of that?
 
Last edited:
  • #4
The cross product can be represented in many ways, as you can see on wikipedia.
One of them is as the determinant of a matrix:
09faa107cbce9b087e622f776ab7af8c.png
 
  • #5
But isn't that different from taking a Jacobian and then finding the determinant of that matrix?
 
  • #6
Ah, I see your point.
I guess I was hasty in answering your question with the Jacobian.

Well, in n dimensions, the cross product is generalized to:
d0e39f2c2f8b6e1eb8f24d720759df89.png


I guess you can use this to calculate the integral.
 
Last edited:
  • #7
There is a beautiful generalization. We will define something called a k-dimensional parametrized-manifold in R^n, that is analogous to say, a 2-dimensional parametrized-surface in R^3.

Here is the definition of a parametrized-manifold:

Let k <= n. Let A be open in R^k, and let g: A ---> R^n be a map of class C^r. The set Y = g(A), together with the map g, constitute what is called a parametrized-manifold of dimension k. We denote this parametrized-manifold by Y_g; and we define the k-dimensional volume of Y_g by the equation [tex] v(Y_g) = \int_A V(Dg) [/tex], provided the integral exists.

Here, Dg is the derivative of g, and [tex] V(Dg) = \sqrt{det[Dg^{tr}Dg]} [/tex].

Note that if f is a continuous map from Y_g to R then the integral of f over Y_g, with respect to volume, is defined by [tex] \int_{Y_g} f dV = \int_A (f \circ g) V(Dg) [/tex]

We use the notation dV in the integral to denote integral with respect to volumeEDIT: Also note that [tex] Dg^{tr}Dg [/tex[ is always a square matrix, so taking the determinant of it is never a problem.
 

1. What is the concept of generalization in surface integrals?

The concept of generalization in surface integrals refers to the process of extending the mathematical principles and techniques used for calculating surface integrals to a broader range of surfaces. This allows for a more comprehensive understanding and application of surface integrals in various fields of science and engineering.

2. How is the generalization of surface integrals different from the traditional approach?

The traditional approach to surface integrals involves calculating the integral over a specific type of surface, such as a plane or a sphere. In contrast, the generalization of surface integrals allows for the calculation of integrals over a wider range of surfaces, including irregular surfaces and surfaces in higher dimensions.

3. What are the benefits of generalizing surface integrals?

Generalizing surface integrals allows for a more flexible and versatile approach to solving problems in various scientific and engineering fields. It also provides a deeper understanding of the underlying mathematical principles, which can lead to more accurate and efficient solutions.

4. How is the concept of generalization applied in real-world scenarios?

The concept of generalization in surface integrals is applied in many real-world scenarios, such as calculating the flow of fluids over complex surfaces, determining the electric or magnetic field around irregularly shaped objects, and analyzing the heat transfer on non-uniform surfaces.

5. Are there any limitations to the generalization of surface integrals?

While generalization allows for a wider range of surfaces to be included in surface integrals, there are still some limitations. For example, some surfaces may be too complex to be accurately represented mathematically, or the generalization may not work for certain types of integrals, such as line integrals.

Similar threads

Replies
1
Views
2K
Replies
8
Views
173
Replies
2
Views
1K
Replies
2
Views
1K
Replies
1
Views
934
Replies
2
Views
929
Replies
1
Views
2K
Replies
6
Views
2K
Back
Top