On an alternative Stokes theorem

AI Thread Summary
An alternative form of Stokes' theorem was presented, prompting a request for proof and clarification. The discussion highlights that modifying a theorem while retaining its name is inappropriate unless done collaboratively. The alternative notation appears equivalent to the original Stokes' theorem, and a method for proving this equivalence using vector calculus is suggested. There is also a misunderstanding regarding the nature of the inquiry, with the original poster clarifying that their question is general rather than homework-related. The conversation emphasizes the importance of clear communication, especially for non-native English speakers seeking assistance.
curupira
Messages
5
Reaction score
0
I find in a homework an alternative Stokes theorem tha i wasn't knew before. I wold like to know that it is really true. Any can give me a proof please?

It is:

Int (line) dℓ′× A = Int (surface)dS′×∇′× A
 
Physics news on Phys.org
First off, you cannot modify someone else's theorem and still leave his name attached to it (unless you collaborate with him).
Secondly, I think that this belongs in the Homework sub-forum.
 
I can't really read your equation very well but it looks like Stoke's theorem written using alternative notation.

I bet it is equivalent and you can show it with a few lines of manipulation.
 
Use the vector field:

<br /> \vec{F} = \vec{C} \times \vec{A}<br />

where \vec{C} is an arbitrary, but constant vector in the original Stokes' Theorem. Perform some simplifications for:

<br /> \nabla \times \vec{F}<br />

using nabla calculus and you will arrive at your alternative form of Stokes' Theorem.
 
Danger said:
First off, you cannot modify someone else's theorem and still leave his name attached to it (unless you collaborate with him).
Secondly, I think that this belongs in the Homework sub-forum.

Well, First, I think that you don't understood what I say, because i don't speak english, so its hard but I try to post, others understood me and have answered my question. In fact you don't understood nothing.

Second, It is a general question, and don't a homework question, my homework I solved , but there was a little part incomprehensible to me.

I don't want damage the forum, but think that is possible stay posting here without to know english, cause there's people here that help me, and it is usefull to me.
Thanks!
 
TL;DR Summary: I came across this question from a Sri Lankan A-level textbook. Question - An ice cube with a length of 10 cm is immersed in water at 0 °C. An observer observes the ice cube from the water, and it seems to be 7.75 cm long. If the refractive index of water is 4/3, find the height of the ice cube immersed in the water. I could not understand how the apparent height of the ice cube in the water depends on the height of the ice cube immersed in the water. Does anyone have an...
Thread 'Variable mass system : water sprayed into a moving container'
Starting with the mass considerations #m(t)# is mass of water #M_{c}# mass of container and #M(t)# mass of total system $$M(t) = M_{C} + m(t)$$ $$\Rightarrow \frac{dM(t)}{dt} = \frac{dm(t)}{dt}$$ $$P_i = Mv + u \, dm$$ $$P_f = (M + dm)(v + dv)$$ $$\Delta P = M \, dv + (v - u) \, dm$$ $$F = \frac{dP}{dt} = M \frac{dv}{dt} + (v - u) \frac{dm}{dt}$$ $$F = u \frac{dm}{dt} = \rho A u^2$$ from conservation of momentum , the cannon recoils with the same force which it applies. $$\quad \frac{dm}{dt}...

Similar threads

Back
Top