Integral over an arbitrary surface

  • Context: Graduate 
  • Thread starter Thread starter Starproj
  • Start date Start date
  • Tags Tags
    Integral Surface
Click For Summary

Discussion Overview

The discussion revolves around the evaluation of an integral over an arbitrary surface, specifically in the context of mass flux. Participants are exploring the claim that this integral equals 4π radians and are seeking clarification on the conditions under which the denominator (r²) drops out of the equation.

Discussion Character

  • Exploratory
  • Technical explanation
  • Debate/contested
  • Mathematical reasoning

Main Points Raised

  • One participant requests a proof for the integral equating to 4π and questions the dropping of the r² term.
  • Another suggests rewriting the integral as a triple integral in spherical coordinates, providing a formula for the area element dA.
  • A participant asserts that the integral becomes independent of the local radius due to the 1/r² factor, leading to the conclusion that it equals the solid angle of 4π.
  • A reference to a textbook is provided, indicating that this concept is related to Gauss' law in electromagnetism.
  • One participant expresses confusion, claiming to arrive at a result of zero instead of 4π, and seeks help in identifying their error.
  • Another participant points out that two angular variables are required for the surface integral, implying a misunderstanding in the integration process.
  • A later reply indicates that the limits of integration for theta should be from 0 to π, but this does not resolve the issue of obtaining a zero result.
  • One participant notes a mix-up between different definitions of theta during the integration process and suggests reviewing the provided reference for clarity.

Areas of Agreement / Disagreement

Participants do not reach a consensus, as there are conflicting interpretations of the integral's evaluation, with some asserting it equals 4π while others arrive at zero. The discussion remains unresolved with multiple competing views.

Contextual Notes

There are indications of missing assumptions regarding the integration limits and the definitions of the variables involved, which may affect the evaluation of the integral.

Starproj
Messages
18
Reaction score
0
Hi,

I am studying a section on mass flux and have come across the following integral over an arbitrary surface. I am told that the integral equals 4pi radians. Can someone direct me to a proof of this and explain why the denominator (r2) drops out?

Thanks!
 

Attachments

  • massflux.JPG
    massflux.JPG
    6.5 KB · Views: 686
Physics news on Phys.org
Essentially, that integral, due to the 1/r^2-factor in the integrand becomes independent of the local radius, and equals therefore the value of the solid angle the surface represents with respect to the origin. That again equals 4pi.
 
There is a nice explanation of this in "Mathematical methods for physicists" by Arfken and Weber section 1.14 page 79. This is also known as Gauss' law in electromagnetism.
 
I am not seeing something, for I get the integral to be zero, not 4pi. I have attached my work - can anyone spot where I am going wrong?

Thanks!
 

Attachments

  • Solution.JPG
    Solution.JPG
    17.5 KB · Views: 781
You are at a SURFACE.

You are required TWO angular variables, not just one.

Go back and read some more..
 
I caught the mistake where the limits of integration for theta are 0 to pi, not 2pi. But that doesn't eliminate the integer value of cosine, giving zero.

This may be a little above my level, which is why I am so frustrated. I think the book just wanted me to "take their word for it." I would really appreciate some help. Is there an error in my substitutions in the calculus? Why can't I get this to work out?
 
You are mixing two different thetas. When you are integrating on a sphere, n is parallel to g, so cos(theta) is one because this theta is zero. To see why this theorem holds for arbitrary surfaces you should check out the reference I gave.
 

Similar threads

  • · Replies 6 ·
Replies
6
Views
3K
  • · Replies 5 ·
Replies
5
Views
2K
  • · Replies 1 ·
Replies
1
Views
2K
  • · Replies 1 ·
Replies
1
Views
1K
  • · Replies 5 ·
Replies
5
Views
2K
  • · Replies 4 ·
Replies
4
Views
3K
  • · Replies 8 ·
Replies
8
Views
3K
  • · Replies 1 ·
Replies
1
Views
3K
  • · Replies 19 ·
Replies
19
Views
5K
Replies
3
Views
3K