Line integral of scalar field ( piecewise curve)

Click For Summary
SUMMARY

The discussion centers on the differentiation of the line integral of a scalar field along piecewise curves, specifically segments c2 and c3. For segment c2, the author differentiates dx with respect to dy, resulting in dx = 0, as y is the only variable along the path. In contrast, for segment c3, the differentiation is performed on the function f=y with respect to x, leading to dy/dx = 0. The slopes of both segments are zero due to the nature of the paths defined by the functions.

PREREQUISITES
  • Understanding of line integrals in vector calculus
  • Familiarity with differentiation of functions of multiple variables
  • Knowledge of piecewise functions and their graphical representations
  • Basic concepts of slopes and tangents in calculus
NEXT STEPS
  • Study the properties of line integrals in scalar fields
  • Learn about differentiation techniques for functions of two variables
  • Explore graphical interpretations of piecewise functions
  • Investigate the implications of zero slopes in calculus
USEFUL FOR

Students studying calculus, particularly those focusing on vector calculus and line integrals, as well as educators seeking to clarify concepts related to differentiation along piecewise curves.

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: 424
  • 11.jpg
    11.jpg
    15 KB · Views: 421
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)
 

Similar threads

  • · Replies 4 ·
Replies
4
Views
2K
Replies
6
Views
3K
Replies
12
Views
5K
Replies
12
Views
2K
Replies
3
Views
2K
  • · Replies 3 ·
Replies
3
Views
2K
  • · Replies 32 ·
2
Replies
32
Views
4K
  • · Replies 12 ·
Replies
12
Views
2K
  • · Replies 1 ·
Replies
1
Views
1K
Replies
3
Views
2K