Multivariable calculus problem

Click For Summary
The discussion centers on a multivariable calculus problem involving the transformation of a Cartesian equation to a semi-cylindrical coordinate equation. The original poster struggles with part b of the problem, specifically how to systematically perform this transformation without relying on sketches. They argue that the provided solution incorrectly calculates the volume integral by omitting necessary components, suggesting that four triple integrals are required instead of two. Additionally, they propose that using Cartesian coordinates might simplify the calculations. The importance of using sketches when changing coordinates or integration orders is emphasized as a critical step in the problem-solving process.
Clara Chung
Messages
300
Reaction score
13

Homework Statement


44.png

48.png


Homework Equations

The Attempt at a Solution


I have attached the problem and solution. I don’t know how to do part b even I have looked at the solution. How to transform the original cartesian equation to the semi cylindral coordinate equation? Is there is systematical way to transform it without thinking about the sketch?
 

Attachments

  • 44.png
    44.png
    34.3 KB · Views: 6,642
  • 48.png
    48.png
    87.4 KB · Views: 4,417
Physics news on Phys.org
The integral is a 'volume integral', meaning a function (in this case the function ##z\mapsto 2z##) is integrated over a 3D volume (in this case V).

The formulas for volume integrals are set out on this wiki page. That is what they have used for the first triple integral on the last formula line in the OP. That is the integral of the function ##z\mapsto 2z## over the sector of the cone with cylindrical angle coordinate ##\theta## between ##-\pi/4## and ##\pi/4##. They then take away the integral over the part of the cone above triangle with vertices (0,0,0), ##(1/\sqrt2,-1/\sqrt2,0),\ (1/\sqrt2,1/\sqrt2,0)##.

However I think the formula is wrong because they need to take away another two volumes from the cone sector in the first term, to match the original volume V. Those are (1) the part of the cone sector with ##y<-1/\sqrt2## and (2) the part of the cone sector with ##y>1/\sqrt2##. So the formula should consist of four triple integrals, not two. The last two can be combined and multiplied by 2, since they give the same value, but as far as I can see, they can't get away with only two triple integrals if they start with a cylindrical integral over a cone sector.

Further, given that those last two triple integrals are messy, I suspect it would be easier just to do the whole thing in Cartesian cords.
 
I disagree with @andrewkirk: The author's second solution can be done with those two integrals, but the y limits on the last triple integral are wrong. The y limits should be -x to x. Then both methods give ##\frac \pi 8 - \frac 1 6##.
And @Clara Chung: No. You should always use a sketch especially when changing coordinates, or orders of integration for that matter.
 
  • Like
Likes Clara Chung
Question: A clock's minute hand has length 4 and its hour hand has length 3. What is the distance between the tips at the moment when it is increasing most rapidly?(Putnam Exam Question) Answer: Making assumption that both the hands moves at constant angular velocities, the answer is ## \sqrt{7} .## But don't you think this assumption is somewhat doubtful and wrong?

Similar threads

  • · Replies 5 ·
Replies
5
Views
1K
  • · Replies 5 ·
Replies
5
Views
2K
  • · Replies 10 ·
Replies
10
Views
3K
  • · Replies 3 ·
Replies
3
Views
2K
  • · Replies 2 ·
Replies
2
Views
2K
  • · Replies 1 ·
Replies
1
Views
2K
  • · Replies 5 ·
Replies
5
Views
2K
  • · Replies 15 ·
Replies
15
Views
2K
Replies
9
Views
2K
  • · Replies 10 ·
Replies
10
Views
2K