Parametric Integral: Understanding Math Problem

Click For Summary
The discussion centers on understanding the integration of the function ƒ(x,y) = y² over the top half of the unit circle, as presented in a specific mathematical paper. Participants clarify that the author is not performing a double integral as initially assumed, but rather a single variable integral along the curved top arc of the circle. The confusion arises from the author's parameterization method, which simplifies the integration process. Recommendations for additional reading on this topic are requested, particularly concerning the derivation of differential forms discussed later in the document. The conversation highlights the complexities of integrating over parametric regions in calculus.
sponsoredwalk
Messages
531
Reaction score
5
Hi, I'm having some trouble understanding what's going on when integrating
the region M on page 10 of http://www.math.boun.edu.tr/instructors/ozturk/eskiders/fall04math488/bachman.pdf" , It may just be the language.

ƒ : ℝ² → ℝ defined by (x,y) ↦ z = ƒ(x,y) = y² is the function we're
integrating over the top half of the unit circle.

1: I think what he's trying to communicate in this derivation is the
standard double integral, \int \ \int_M \ f(x,y) \ dA \ = \ \int \ \int_M \ y^2 \ dy \ dx.
Is that correct? You'll notice he jumps straight into his paramaterization
but would what I've just done here be right?

2: If so then would the bounds on the integral become:

\int \ \int_M \ f(x,y) \ dA \ = \ \int_{-1}^1 \ \int_0^{( \sqrt{1 - x^2})} \ y^2 \ dy \ dx ?

3: If that is correct then I think it would explain why the author chose to
set up a paramaterization of the region M. When he goes on to show that
the unit circle can be paramaterized in different ways it reduces a double
integral to a single integral & is just easier. Is that why?

4: I've never seen anyone paramaterize double integrals in the way he
does, could you recommend some reading material that explains what he
is doing as I can't seem to find any myself.

I have more questions, mainly to do with pages 11-14 where, I think, he is
deriving differential forms (in my meagre estimation) but I'll hold off for
now, thanks for any assistance! :biggrin:
 
Last edited by a moderator:
Physics news on Phys.org
sponsoredwalk said:
Hi, I'm having some trouble understanding what's going on when integrating
the region M on page 10 of http://www.math.boun.edu.tr/instructors/ozturk/eskiders/fall04math488/bachman.pdf" , It may just be the language.

ƒ : ℝ² → ℝ defined by (x,y) ↦ z = ƒ(x,y) = y² is the function we're
integrating over the top half of the unit circle.

1: I think what he's trying to communicate in this derivation is the
standard double integral, \int \ \int_M \ f(x,y) \ dA \ = \ \int \ \int_M \ y^2 \ dy \ dx.
Is that correct? You'll notice he jumps straight into his paramaterization
but would what I've just done here be right?

2: If so then would the bounds on the integral become:

\int \ \int_M \ f(x,y) \ dA \ = \ \int_{-1}^1 \ \int_0^{( \sqrt{1 - x^2})} \ y^2 \ dy \ dx ?

No, that isn't what he is doing on page 10. He is doing a single variable integral along the curved top arc. He doesn't up the dimension until page 14.

Disclaimer: Don't expect too much more from me on this topic; I'm not a differential forms kind of guy.:cool:
 
Last edited by a moderator:
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
3
Views
2K
  • · Replies 2 ·
Replies
2
Views
1K
Replies
2
Views
2K
  • · Replies 19 ·
Replies
19
Views
2K
  • · Replies 4 ·
Replies
4
Views
2K
Replies
4
Views
2K
  • · Replies 5 ·
Replies
5
Views
1K
  • · Replies 10 ·
Replies
10
Views
2K
Replies
20
Views
2K
  • · Replies 6 ·
Replies
6
Views
2K