Line integral of scalar field ( piecewise curve)

chetzread
Messages
798
Reaction score
1

Homework Statement



for the line segment c2 , why did the author want to differentiate dx with respect to dy ? and he gt dx = 0 ?

I'm curious why did he didnt do so for C3 , where dy= 0 ..Why didnt he also differentiate dy with dx ? dy/dx = 0 ?

Homework Equations

The Attempt at a Solution


is there anything wrong with the working ?
 

Attachments

  • 10.jpg
    10.jpg
    29.9 KB · Views: 401
  • 11.jpg
    11.jpg
    15 KB · Views: 397
Physics news on Phys.org
chetzread said:
for the line segment c2 , why did the author want to differentiate dx with respect to dy ? and he gt dx = 0 ?

actually one differentiates a function f(x,y) with respect to variable x or y;
your statement is in error - during c2 he is taking d/dy of f=x and as y is only variable on the path the slope of the path d/dy of x comes to zero.

chetzread said:
I'm curious why did he didnt do so for C3 , where dy= 0 ..Why didnt he also differentiate dy with dx ? dy/dx = 0 ?
here also the author is taking d/dx of the function f=y as the variable is x ...not y as in the previous path and the slope is again zero.
slope of a curve is defined by tan of the angle made by a drawn tangent at the point under consideration..
Imagine f equivalent to say F(x,y) ...the graph of f is of a type x=0 for the c2 ( y from 1 to zero) and y=0 for c3 ( x going from 0 to 1)
 
There are two things I don't understand about this problem. First, when finding the nth root of a number, there should in theory be n solutions. However, the formula produces n+1 roots. Here is how. The first root is simply ##\left(r\right)^{\left(\frac{1}{n}\right)}##. Then you multiply this first root by n additional expressions given by the formula, as you go through k=0,1,...n-1. So you end up with n+1 roots, which cannot be correct. Let me illustrate what I mean. For this...
Back
Top