Physical significance of integral of F cross dr

Click For Summary

Discussion Overview

The discussion centers around the physical significance and practical applications of the integral of the cross product of a force vector and an infinitesimal displacement vector, specifically in the context of torque and its representation in Newtonian mechanics. Participants explore whether this integral has relevance beyond known applications like Biot-Savart's Law.

Discussion Character

  • Exploratory
  • Technical explanation
  • Debate/contested

Main Points Raised

  • Some participants suggest that the integral ##\int \vec F \times d\vec{r}## could have physical significance, particularly in relation to torque and angular momentum.
  • Others clarify that torque is typically defined as ##\vec r \times \vec F##, raising questions about the relevance of the integral in calculating net torque.
  • One participant points out that the integral does not represent torque on a body and suggests that the total torque would be better represented by a volume integral, ##\vec{\tau} = -\int \vec F \times \vec r dV##.
  • There is uncertainty about the practical application of the line integral ##\int \vec F \times d\vec{r}##, with some participants expressing doubt about its relevance even in the context of Biot-Savart's Law.

Areas of Agreement / Disagreement

Participants do not reach a consensus on the physical significance of the integral ##\int \vec F \times d\vec{r}##, with multiple competing views regarding its application and relevance to torque.

Contextual Notes

Participants highlight the distinction between ##d \vec r## as an infinitesimal change in position and ##\vec r## as the position vector, indicating a potential misunderstanding of the integral's application in calculating torque.

arpon
Messages
234
Reaction score
16
In the vector calculus course, I calculated integrals like,
##\int \vec F \times \vec{dr} ##
Does this kind of integrals have physical significance or practical application other than Biot-Savart's Law?
 
Physics news on Phys.org
In Newtonian mechanics the integral represents torque or rate of change of angular momentum.

The cross-product as a mathematical tool was invented probably because of its practical application. Although its development as a mathematical tool was post-Newton, it is very useful in mechancs.

AM
 
Andrew Mason said:
In Newtonian mechanics the integral represents torque or rate of change of angular momentum.

The cross-product as a mathematical tool was invented probably because of its practical application. Although its development as a mathematical tool was post-Newton, it is very useful in mechancs.

AM
Isn't torque defined as ##\vec r \times \vec F## ?
 
arpon said:
Isn't torque defined as ##\vec r \times \vec F## ?

##\vec r \times \vec F = - \vec F \times \vec r##
 
Yes. That is just a convention. The difference is the sign or direction of the torque vector.

AM
 
PeroK said:
##\vec r \times \vec F = - \vec F \times \vec r##
That was not my point. ##d \vec r## represents infinitesimal change in position vector, while ##\vec r## represents position vector. Could you please give me a practical example where the net torque is calculated by ##\int \vec F \times d \vec r## ?
 
arpon said:
That was not my point. ##d \vec r## represents infinitesimal change in position vector, while ##\vec r## represents position vector. Could you please give me a practical example where the net torque is calculated by ##\int \vec F \times d \vec r## ?

The line integral doesn't represent the torque on a body. The total torque on a body would be a volume integral:

##\vec{\tau} = -\int \vec F \times \vec r dV##

I'm not sure when you would use the line integral.
 
arpon said:
That was not my point. ##d \vec r## represents infinitesimal change in position vector, while ##\vec r## represents position vector. Could you please give me a practical example where the net torque is calculated by ##\int \vec F \times d \vec r## ?
I see your point. PeroK is quite right that ##\int \vec F \times d \vec r## does not represent torque. I am not sure what it would represent. I also don't see how it applies even to the Biot-Savart Law.

AM
 

Similar threads

  • · Replies 9 ·
Replies
9
Views
1K
  • · Replies 3 ·
Replies
3
Views
2K
  • · Replies 33 ·
2
Replies
33
Views
5K
  • · Replies 35 ·
2
Replies
35
Views
5K
  • · Replies 10 ·
Replies
10
Views
3K
Replies
20
Views
2K
  • · Replies 10 ·
Replies
10
Views
2K
  • · Replies 2 ·
Replies
2
Views
2K
  • · Replies 1 ·
Replies
1
Views
2K