How do I integrate surface area using rectangular or polar coordinates?

Click For Summary

Discussion Overview

The discussion revolves around the integration of surface area for a paraboloid above a cone, specifically the paraboloid defined by z = 9 - x^2 - y^2 and the cone defined by z = 8√(x^2 + y^2). Participants explore different coordinate systems (rectangular and polar) and methods for setting up the integral, leading to varying results and interpretations of the surface area calculation.

Discussion Character

  • Technical explanation
  • Debate/contested
  • Mathematical reasoning

Main Points Raised

  • One participant describes the process of finding the surface area using rectangular coordinates and then converting to cylindrical coordinates, leading to an integral of r√(1 + 4r^2).
  • Another participant argues against using Cartesian coordinates, suggesting a polar approach directly, and provides a different expression for the surface area integral, resulting in π√5.
  • A third participant questions the expression for the magnitude of the cross product, noting a discrepancy in the results obtained from different parametrizations.
  • Concerns are raised about whether the transformation to polar coordinates affects the integration process, with references to expected forms of the integral based on standard texts.
  • One participant clarifies that when integrating a surface defined by parameters, the integration is with respect to those parameters rather than being strictly in rectangular or polar coordinates.

Areas of Agreement / Disagreement

Participants express differing views on the appropriate coordinate system and method for integration, with no consensus reached on which approach is definitively correct. Multiple competing interpretations and results are presented.

Contextual Notes

Participants highlight potential confusion regarding the transformation between coordinate systems and the implications for the surface area integral. There are unresolved questions about the correctness of specific expressions and the assumptions underlying the integration process.

Sculptured
Messages
23
Reaction score
0
Just had my test on Vector Fields and there was one question which really confused me. It asked to find the surface area of the parabaloid z = 9-x^2 -y^2 which is above the cone z = 8Sqrt[x^2 + y^2]. My memory told me to use the differential in rectangular coordinates and then convert to cylindrical. The process of Sqrt[1 + dz/dx ^2 + dz/dy ^2]. This leads to an integral of r Sqrt[1 + 4r^2] in cylindrical coordinates. After doing so and getting an answer my teacher said he messed up when creating the problem and that the integral turned out to be r^2 * Sqrt[1 + 4r^2]. This seemed non-intuitive and took me a good amount of time before I went through the process of parametrizing the variables to: x = tcos(theta), y = tsin(theta), and z = 9-t^2. (t being the same as r). Finding the partial derivatives and solving for the magnitude of the cross product led me to t Sqrt[1 + 4t^2] for my area integral. Making my area differential t dt dtheta gave me that extra t to make the t squared; however, this seems confusing because each method created different answers. The first thing coming to mind would be that because my parameters are already in polar coordinates the extra t in the differential shouldn't be there and I should be just able to integrate with dt dtheta. Which way is correct and why?
 
Physics news on Phys.org
"The process of Sqrt[1 + dz/dx ^2 + dz/dy ^2]." Is there a verb in that sentence?:rolleyes:

I see no reason to use Cartesian coordinates at all. Find the area of the surface z= 9- r2 above the cone z= 8r. The paraboloid cuts the cone when 9-r2= 8r or r2+ 8r- 9= (r+9)(r-1)= 0 or r= -9, r= 1. Since r must be positive, the paraboloid and cone intersect on the circle r= 1 and the paraboloid is above the cone for r< 1.

Use the polar coordinates, r and \theta as parameters, the paraboloid is described by x= r cos(\theta), y= r sin(\theta), z= 9- r^2. The "position vector" is \vec{r}= r cos(\theta)\vec{i}+ r sin(\theta)\vec{j}+ (9- r^2)\vec{k}. The derivatives with respect to r and \theta are cos(\theta)\vec{i}+ sin(\theta)\vec{j}- 2r\vec{k} and -r sin(\theta)\vec{i}+ r cos(\theta)\vec{j} respectively. The "fundamental vector product" is the cross product of those derivatives, -2r^2 cos(\theta)\vec{i}- 2r^2 sin(\theta)\vec{j}+ r\vec{k} and the differential of surface area is its length times drd\theta, \sqrt{4r^2+ r^2}drd\theta = \sqrt{5} rdrd\theta.

The surface area, then, is
\sqrt{5}\int_{r=0}^1\int_{\theta= 0}^{2\pi}r drd\theta= \pi \sqrt{5}.
 
Last edited by a moderator:
I'm wondering how you got the expression Sqrt[4r^2 + r^2] dr dtheta. I found the magnitude of the cross product to be Sqrt[4r^4 + r^2]. Integrating over r from 0 to 1 and theta from 0 to 2pi gave me (1/6)(-1 +5*Sqrt[5])*pi. The same answer as when I use x=x, y=y, and z=f(x,y)= 9-x^2 -y^2 as my parametrizations and then convert to polar once I have the integral set up.

My problem is that once I use the parameters x=r Cos[theta], y=r Sin[theta], and z=9-r^2, wouldn't the transformation change it so that once I go to integrate the surface area I'm really integrating over rectangular co-ordinates instead of polar? This would also give me the integral of Sqrt[4r^4 + r^2]*r dr dtheta instead of what my teacher got: Sqrt[4r^4 + r^2] * r^2 dr dtheta. The former being the way I would expect it to be done and how my book(Stewart) does it for a parabaloid once it is in polar co-ordinates.

Thanks.
 
If you write any surface in terms of two parameters: x= f(u,v), y= g(u,v), z= h(u,v) then you are integrating with respect to the two parameters u and v, not "rectangular coordinates" or "polar coordinates".
 

Similar threads

  • · Replies 5 ·
Replies
5
Views
3K
  • · Replies 1 ·
Replies
1
Views
3K
  • · Replies 13 ·
Replies
13
Views
3K
Replies
2
Views
1K
  • · Replies 2 ·
Replies
2
Views
3K
  • · Replies 2 ·
Replies
2
Views
3K
  • · Replies 12 ·
Replies
12
Views
9K
  • · Replies 4 ·
Replies
4
Views
3K
  • · Replies 14 ·
Replies
14
Views
3K
  • · Replies 5 ·
Replies
5
Views
3K