Is there an algebraic derivation of the area element in polar coordinates?

Click For Summary

Discussion Overview

The discussion revolves around the derivation of the area element in polar coordinates, specifically whether an algebraic derivation exists starting from Cartesian coordinates. Participants explore the transformation of the Cartesian area element using the relationships between Cartesian and polar coordinates.

Discussion Character

  • Exploratory, Technical explanation, Debate/contested

Main Points Raised

  • Some participants suggest that the derivation of the area element in polar coordinates can be approached through a change of coordinates from Cartesian coordinates.
  • Others clarify that the algebraic derivation involves the use of 2-forms and the computation of the exterior product of differentials.
  • One participant emphasizes the importance of the Jacobian in the change of variables, indicating that the area element is scaled by the determinant of the Jacobian matrix.
  • Another participant provides a detailed calculation of the exterior product, leading to the expression for the area element, but notes that some terms cancel out due to properties of exterior derivatives.
  • There is a mention of the need to clarify the steps involved in the derivation, with some participants preferring a gradual approach to the problem.

Areas of Agreement / Disagreement

Participants generally agree on the relevance of the change of coordinates and the Jacobian in deriving the area element, but there is no consensus on the specific steps or methods to achieve the derivation. Some participants express uncertainty about how to transition from the differentials to the area element expression.

Contextual Notes

Limitations include the potential for misunderstanding the nature of the algebraic derivation versus the geometric interpretation, as well as the complexity of the exterior product calculations that some participants find challenging.

Who May Find This Useful

This discussion may be useful for students and practitioners interested in the mathematical foundations of coordinate transformations, particularly in the context of calculus and differential geometry.

SamRoss
Gold Member
Messages
256
Reaction score
36
TL;DR
There is a simple geometric derivation of the area element in polar coordinates. Is there an algebraic derivation as well?
There is a simple geometric derivation of the area element ## r dr d\theta## in polar coordinates such as in the following link: http://citadel.sjfc.edu/faculty/kgreen/vector/Block3/jacob/node4.html

Is there an algebraic derivation as well beginning with Cartesian coordinates and using ## x=rcos\theta## and ## y=rsin\theta ## to transform the Cartesian area element ##dx dy##?
 
Physics news on Phys.org
SamRoss said:
There is a simple geometric derivation of the area element ## r dr d\theta## in polar coordinates such as in the following link: http://citadel.sjfc.edu/faculty/kgreen/vector/Block3/jacob/node4.html

Is there an algebraic derivation as well beginning with Cartesian coordinates and using ## x=rcos\theta## and ## y=rsin\theta ## to transform the Cartesian area element ##dx dy##?
I am not sure what you mean by algebraic derivation, this is usually called a change of coordinates. In this case, between polars and Cartesian.
 
WWGD said:
I am not sure what you mean by algebraic derivation, this is usually called a change of coordinates. In this case, between polars and Cartesian.

Yes, that is what I'm looking for.
 
The setup ( generalized to n variables) is usually of the sort:
##x=f(a,b),\text{ so }
dx=f_a(a,b)da##
##y=g(a,b)\text , \text{ so } dy=f_b(a,b)db##
Where ##f_a, f_b ## are the partials with respect to ##a,b ##. In this case we use ##x=rcos\theta##, etc.

Is that helpful?
 
Last edited by a moderator:
WWGD said:
The setup ( generalized to n variables) is usually of the sort:
##x=f(a,b),\text{ so }
dx=f_a(a,b)da##
##y=g(a,b)\text , \text{ so } dy=f_b(a,b)db##
Where ##f_a, f_b ## are the partials with respect to ##a,b ##. In this case we use ##x=rcos\theta##, etc.

Is that helpful?

<br /> dx = f_a(a,b)\,da + f_b(a,b)\,db etc...

EDIT: Just expanding dx and dy in the new coordinates and multiplying those expressions will not yield the correct answer; instead you must calculate the exterior product dx \wedge dy.
 
Last edited:
  • Like
Likes   Reactions: Cryo
pasmith said:
<br /> dx = f_a(a,b)\,da + f_b(a,b)\,db etc...

EDIT: Just expanding dx and dy in the new coordinates and multiplying those expressions will not yield the correct answer; instead you must calculate the exterior product dx \wedge dy.
OP is about change of coordinates, not about finding the total derivative.
 
WWGD said:
OP is about change of coordinates, not about finding the total derivative.

The OP wants an algebraic derivation of the expression for the area element, and the relvant algebra is that of 2-forms. The derivation is then to compute dx \wedge dy in terms of da \wedge db, for which purpose dx must be expressed as dx = f_a\,da + f_b\,db and similarly for dy.

Alternatively the OP could start from dx\,dy = \left \| \frac{\partial \mathbf{r}}{\partial a} \times<br /> \frac{\partial \mathbf{r}}{\partial b}\right\| da\,db.

In any event, I'm not sure how the OP is supposed to get from dx = f_a\,da and dy = f_b\,db to dx\,dy = |f_a g_b - f_b g_a|da\,db.
 
  • Like
Likes   Reactions: fresh_42
I referred specifically to the change of coordinates, not to the area element. You expect an answer for a question I did not address. I take things step by step, and start with a change of coordinates. As stated, this is correct. Yes, you did complete the needed steps; I was doing it more gradually.Edit. But, yes, this is correct, the new area is scaled by the norm of the determinant of the change of variables.
 
Last edited:
So, yes, to clarify, what pasmith says is correct. The change of area element is given by dadb=dxdy|J(x,y)| , where J(x,y) is the Jacobian of the change of variables matrix.
 
  • #10
##x=r\cos\theta, y=r\sin\theta \rightarrow dx=\cos \theta dr + -r\sin\theta d\theta, dy=\sin\theta dr + r\cos\theta d\theta##

thus, ##dx \wedge dy = \cos \theta dr + -r\sin\theta d\theta \wedge sin\theta dr + r\cos\theta d\theta \rightarrow \cos \theta dr \wedge sin\theta dr + \cos \theta dr \wedge r\cos\theta d\theta + -r\sin\theta d\theta \wedge \sin\theta dr + -r\sin\theta d\theta \wedge r\cos\theta d\theta \rightarrow r \cos^2 \theta dr \wedge d\theta + -r \sin^2 \theta d\theta \wedge dr \rightarrow r \cos^2 \theta dr \wedge d\theta + r \sin^2 \theta dr \wedge d\theta ##

Which finally gives us: ## (\cos^2 \theta + \sin^2 \theta) r dr\wedge d\theta \rightarrow r dr\wedge d\theta \rightarrow r drd\theta ##

You may wonder why some terms went to zero and how i can switch the signs, and that would be due to some properties of exterior derivatives (and wedge products), which i suggest you look into. Hopefully this is what you were looking for.
 
  • Like
Likes   Reactions: fresh_42
  • #11
I believed s/he wanted to go through it gradually , so I first went over the change of variables, but I guess we have to wait and see if they come back and tell us what they wanted.
 
  • #12
Hi everybody. Thanks for all the help and sorry it took me so long to reply back. I had attempted the problem using a change of coordinates and was unable to get it to work. Thank you WWGD for bringing up the Jacobian. I had not thought to use that. Thank you Pasmith for bringing up the exterior product. That is a concept I was unfamiliar with and I will be sure to read up on it. And thank you Romsofia for the full solution. I appreciate everyone's assistance with this.
 
  • Like
Likes   Reactions: WWGD

Similar threads

  • · Replies 13 ·
Replies
13
Views
3K
  • · Replies 5 ·
Replies
5
Views
4K
  • · Replies 2 ·
Replies
2
Views
4K
  • · Replies 12 ·
Replies
12
Views
2K
Replies
8
Views
2K
  • · Replies 3 ·
Replies
3
Views
2K
  • · Replies 1 ·
Replies
1
Views
3K
  • · Replies 4 ·
Replies
4
Views
7K
  • · Replies 5 ·
Replies
5
Views
3K
  • · Replies 1 ·
Replies
1
Views
3K