Help with revision - area integrals

Click For Summary

Discussion Overview

The discussion revolves around a mathematical problem involving the calculation of volume and moments of inertia for a solid bounded by a paraboloid and a cone. Participants explore the appropriate coordinate system for integration, the intersection of the surfaces, and the setup of integrals for various calculations. The scope includes theoretical and mathematical reasoning related to integration techniques and coordinate transformations.

Discussion Character

  • Exploratory
  • Mathematical reasoning
  • Homework-related

Main Points Raised

  • Some participants propose using cylindrical coordinates for easier calculations, while others express uncertainty about the conversion process.
  • One participant discusses the advantages of using Cartesian coordinates for integration, citing established theorems and simpler mathematics in R^n for straightforward integrals.
  • There is a suggestion to consider whether volume calculations for the given objects can be easily performed using standard calculus in three dimensions.

Areas of Agreement / Disagreement

Participants have not reached a consensus on the best coordinate system to use, with differing opinions on the ease of calculations in cylindrical versus Cartesian coordinates. The discussion remains unresolved regarding the optimal approach for the problem.

Contextual Notes

Participants have not fully explored the implications of their proposed methods, and there may be missing assumptions regarding the integration limits and the shapes formed during the integration process.

Kawakaze
Messages
144
Reaction score
0
I came across this question on a past paper and would appreciate some help. It is too hard for me at the minute.

The problem -

The volume of a body whose surface is formed on the underside
by the paraboloid z = x2 + y2 and bounded on top by the cone
z = 3-2(x2 +y2)

(a) Explain which coordinate system should be used in order to describe
the shape easily, and transform the surfaces bounding the shape into
this coordinate system (if necessary).

(b) Find the equation of the curve of intersection of the two surfaces, and
describe it.

(c) Explain the order of integration of the variables to facilitate the
formation of the integral. State without using symbols or too many
numbers what the limits will be for each integration, and describe the
shape formed after each integration, starting with the basic cuboid
element.

The density of the material is σ(1 + ρ) where σ is a constant, and ρ is the
distance from the z-axis.

(d) Set up the volume integral to find the mass of the volume, M, and
determine the value of the mass in terms of σ.

(e) Set up the volume integral to find the moment of inertia of the volume
about the z-axis, and determine this moment of inertia in terms of M.

(f) Set up the integral to find the moment of inertia about the x-axis, but
do not evaluate it.

(g) Will the moment of inertia about the y-axis be the same as, or
different to, that about the x-axis? Briefly justify your conclusions.
 
Physics news on Phys.org
Hey Kawakaze.

To get started, you should help us by telling us what you have thought about and what you have tried: even if it's only something partial and a few ideas rather than a fully fledged attempt.
 
Well, I am guessing cylindrical coordinates would make the easiest calculations. But I really suck at the conversion.
 
In terms of integration and calculating integrals, we have a well developed way of finding integrals that are expressed in Cartesian space (i.e. R^n).

For the Riemann integral in R^n, we have well established theorems if we want to calculate integrals and if the integrals are in a simple enough form, then it is easier to use the R^n system since the mathematics is a lot simpler.

You can do calculations and stuff in curved geometries (and this is exactly what has to be done in things like General Relativity in physics as well as things in engineering and applied mathematics), but if it's in R^n and it's simple, then its a lot easier to deal with.

One question you might want to ask yourself is for these given objects (cone and paraboloid), is it straight-forward to do a volume calculation for these objects if we use calculus for normal three dimensions using the normal geometry?
 

Similar threads

  • · Replies 5 ·
Replies
5
Views
3K
  • · Replies 4 ·
Replies
4
Views
3K
  • · Replies 11 ·
Replies
11
Views
3K
  • · Replies 2 ·
Replies
2
Views
3K
  • · Replies 4 ·
Replies
4
Views
1K
Replies
5
Views
2K
  • · Replies 10 ·
Replies
10
Views
4K
  • · Replies 8 ·
Replies
8
Views
2K
  • · Replies 4 ·
Replies
4
Views
2K
  • · Replies 3 ·
Replies
3
Views
2K