MHB NICK's question at Yahoo Answers regarding a solid of revolution

  • Thread starter Thread starter MarkFL
  • Start date Start date
  • Tags Tags
    Revolution Solid
AI Thread Summary
The volume of the solid obtained by rotating the region bounded by the curves y=x, y=0, x=2, and x=4 about the line x=1 is calculated using both the washer and shell methods. The washer method reveals that the volume is V=76π/3, derived from two integrals that account for varying inner and outer radii. The shell method confirms this result, yielding the same volume through a different calculation approach. Both methods validate the accuracy of the volume computation. The final answer for the volume is 76π/3.
MarkFL
Gold Member
MHB
Messages
13,284
Reaction score
12
Here is the question:

Calculus ii question!?

Using disks or washers, find the volume of the solid obtained by rotating the region bounded by the curves y=x, y=0, x=2, and x=4 about the line x=1.

Volume = ?

Here is a link to the question:

Calculus ii question!? - Yahoo! Answers

I have posted a link there to this topic so the OP can find my response.
 
Mathematics news on Phys.org
Hello NICK,

Using washers, we find that we have one interval where the inner radius is a function of $y$, and another in which the inner radius is constant. For both intervals, the outer radius is constant.

Thus, we find the volume is:

$$V=\pi\left(\int_0^2 3^2-1^2\,dy+\int_2^4 3^2-(y-1)^2\,dy \right)=$$

$$\pi\left(\left[8y \right]_0^2+\left[9y-\frac{1}{3}(y-1)^3 \right]_2^4 \right)=\pi\left(16+27-\frac{53}{3} \right)=\frac{76\pi}{3}$$

To check our work, let's use the shell method:

$$V=2\pi\int_2^4(x-1)x\,dx=2\pi\left[\frac{x^3}{3}-\frac{x^2}{2} \right]_2^4=$$

$$2\pi\left(\frac{40}{3}-\frac{2}{3} \right)=\frac{76\pi}{3}$$
 
Thread 'Video on imaginary numbers and some queries'
Hi, I was watching the following video. I found some points confusing. Could you please help me to understand the gaps? Thanks, in advance! Question 1: Around 4:22, the video says the following. So for those mathematicians, negative numbers didn't exist. You could subtract, that is find the difference between two positive quantities, but you couldn't have a negative answer or negative coefficients. Mathematicians were so averse to negative numbers that there was no single quadratic...
Thread 'Unit Circle Double Angle Derivations'
Here I made a terrible mistake of assuming this to be an equilateral triangle and set 2sinx=1 => x=pi/6. Although this did derive the double angle formulas it also led into a terrible mess trying to find all the combinations of sides. I must have been tired and just assumed 6x=180 and 2sinx=1. By that time, I was so mindset that I nearly scolded a person for even saying 90-x. I wonder if this is a case of biased observation that seeks to dis credit me like Jesus of Nazareth since in reality...
Thread 'Imaginary Pythagoras'
I posted this in the Lame Math thread, but it's got me thinking. Is there any validity to this? Or is it really just a mathematical trick? Naively, I see that i2 + plus 12 does equal zero2. But does this have a meaning? I know one can treat the imaginary number line as just another axis like the reals, but does that mean this does represent a triangle in the complex plane with a hypotenuse of length zero? Ibix offered a rendering of the diagram using what I assume is matrix* notation...
Back
Top