Hello, does anyone have reference to(or care to write out) fully rigorous proof of Stokes theorem which does not reference Differential Forms? I'm reviewing some physics stuff and I want to relearn it.(adsbygoogle = window.adsbygoogle || []).push({});

I honestly will never use the higher dimensional version but I still want to see a full proof in the 3d case - my analysis texts use differential forms and my calculus books don't provide a real proof. I could learn differential forms but I will not use it and I will then forget, making it kind of a waste of time.

**Physics Forums - The Fusion of Science and Community**

The friendliest, high quality science and math community on the planet! Everyone who loves science is here!

# I Proofs of Stokes Theorem without Differential Forms

Tags:

Have something to add?

Draft saved
Draft deleted

Loading...

Similar Threads - Proofs Stokes Theorem | Date |
---|---|

B Proof of a limit rule | Dec 19, 2017 |

B Proof of quotient rule using Leibniz differentials | Jun 10, 2017 |

B Don't follow one small step in proof | Jun 10, 2017 |

I Why is Stoke's theorem of a closed path equal to zero? | Sep 26, 2016 |

**Physics Forums - The Fusion of Science and Community**