Green's Theorem: Explaining the Bounds Reversal

Click For Summary
SUMMARY

Green's Theorem is defined as ∮_C P dx + Q dy = ∬_D [(δQ/δx) - (δP/δy)] dA due to the necessity of reversing bounds in the proof process. The first integral requires reversing the bounds to maintain the correct orientation of the curve, while the second integral retains its bounds to ensure positivity. This distinction is crucial for achieving the correct formulation of the theorem, as it reflects the orientation of integration along the closed curve.

PREREQUISITES
  • Understanding of vector calculus concepts, specifically line and surface integrals.
  • Familiarity with Green's Theorem and its applications in physics and engineering.
  • Knowledge of partial derivatives and their notation, particularly δP/δy and δQ/δx.
  • Basic skills in interpreting mathematical proofs and the significance of orientation in integration.
NEXT STEPS
  • Study the proof of Green's Theorem in detail, focusing on the role of curve orientation.
  • Explore applications of Green's Theorem in fluid dynamics and electromagnetism.
  • Learn about the relationship between Green's Theorem and Stokes' Theorem.
  • Investigate common mistakes in applying Green's Theorem, particularly regarding bounds and orientation.
USEFUL FOR

Students and professionals in mathematics, physics, and engineering who are looking to deepen their understanding of vector calculus and the implications of Green's Theorem in various applications.

TysonM8
Messages
25
Reaction score
1
I’m having a little trouble understanding why Green’s Theorem is defined as;

∮_C P dx+Q dy = ∬_D [(δQ/δx)-(δP/δy)] dA

Instead of;

∮_C P dx+Q dy = ∬_D [(δQ/δx)+(δP/δy)] dA

When proving the theorem, in the first step you simply reverse the bounds of the second integral to get the result;

∮_C P dx = -∫_(x=a)^(x=b) ∫_(y=g_1 (x))^(y=g_2 (x)) δP/δy dydx

But in the second step, the bounds are kept how they are to keep the double integral positive. So you have;

∮_C Q dy = ∫_(y=a)^(y=b) ∫_(x=h_2 (y))^(x=h_1 (y)) δP/δy dxdy

So can anyone explain why the bounds were reversed in the step?
 
Physics news on Phys.org
Because, in the proof, you reverse the direction along the curve:

You divide the closed curve at two points, t_0 and t_1, and integrate along the top and bottom curves from t_0 to t_1. If you are going counterclockwise around the curve over the top half, then you are going clockwise over the bottom half. In order to have a single integration around the full curve, you have to reverse the direction of one half.
 
That's the first time you reverse the bounds (you also do this for the second step, reversing the bounds a and b), but you reverse the bounds of the second integral (g_1(x) and g_2(x)) later on. The question is, why isn't this done for the second step as well?
 

Similar threads

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