Help extending volumes of revolution to fourth dimension

2dB+2dB~5dB
Messages
1
Reaction score
0
I am currently learning about volumes of revolution in calulus, and have looked ahead to surfaces of revolution as well. I want to try and extend this concept to revolving 3d functions over the x-axis into the fourth dimension. I found this thread:
https://www.physicsforums.com/showthread.php?t=64536
and saw how to find the content of a 3-ball (5th post).

I attemted to use this idea to find the content of the revolution about the x-axis of the revolution about the x-axis of 4-x2 but I couldn't quite puzzle through the method described in the above thread for anything other than spheres. The closest I came was the surface area of the solid of revolution, and realizing that I need to describe the circumference of the 3d solid of revolution with respect to the radius and/or height (for a sphere of radius 1 it would be 2\pissin(r))

Can anyone point me in the right direction, or does this seem way too far past a Calculus DC student in high school? (and if so I'm still really interested in how this would work)
 
Mathematics news on Phys.org
Insights auto threads is broken atm, so I'm manually creating these for new Insight articles. In Dirac’s Principles of Quantum Mechanics published in 1930 he introduced a “convenient notation” he referred to as a “delta function” which he treated as a continuum analog to the discrete Kronecker delta. The Kronecker delta is simply the indexed components of the identity operator in matrix algebra Source: https://www.physicsforums.com/insights/what-exactly-is-diracs-delta-function/ by...
Fermat's Last Theorem has long been one of the most famous mathematical problems, and is now one of the most famous theorems. It simply states that the equation $$ a^n+b^n=c^n $$ has no solutions with positive integers if ##n>2.## It was named after Pierre de Fermat (1607-1665). The problem itself stems from the book Arithmetica by Diophantus of Alexandria. It gained popularity because Fermat noted in his copy "Cubum autem in duos cubos, aut quadratoquadratum in duos quadratoquadratos, et...
Thread 'Imaginary pythagorus'
I posted this in the Lame Math thread, but it's got me thinking. Is there any validity to this? Or is it really just a mathematical trick? Naively, I see that i2 + plus 12 does equal zero2. But does this have a meaning? I know one can treat the imaginary number line as just another axis like the reals, but does that mean this does represent a triangle in the complex plane with a hypotenuse of length zero? Ibix offered a rendering of the diagram using what I assume is matrix* notation...
Back
Top