Prove the work done by F is zero for a curve on a sphere

Click For Summary

Homework Help Overview

The discussion revolves around proving that the work done by a force field on an object moving along a smooth curve on a sphere is zero. The force field is defined in terms of a continuous scalar function and the position vector on the sphere.

Discussion Character

  • Exploratory, Conceptual clarification, Mathematical reasoning

Approaches and Questions Raised

  • Participants explore the implications of the force field's direction and its relationship to the curve on the sphere. There are discussions about the relevance of Green's theorem and Stokes' theorem, as well as the nature of the force vector in relation to the curve.

Discussion Status

Participants are actively engaging with the problem, questioning assumptions about the force field and its direction. Some have reached an intuitive understanding of why the work done may be zero, while others are considering how to formalize this understanding through mathematical proof.

Contextual Notes

There is mention of constraints related to the learning context, such as the fact that Stokes' theorem has not yet been covered in the participants' studies. Additionally, the discussion acknowledges the need to parametrize the curve and consider the properties of the force vector in relation to the sphere.

SolidSnake
Messages
17
Reaction score
0

Homework Statement


Prove that if an object moves along any smooth simple curve C that lies on the sphere [tex]x^2 + y^2 + z^2 = a^2[/tex] in the force field [tex]F(x,y,z) = f(x,y,z)(xi + yj +zk)[/tex] where [tex]f[/tex] is a continuous function, then the work done by [tex]F[/tex] is zero.


Homework Equations



The Attempt at a Solution



I tried to show the curl of F was zero but realized that since f can be anything it'd be impossible to show that the curl was zero, atleast i think so :confused:. Not really sure how else to approach this problem. Looking for a hint in the right direction.
 
Physics news on Phys.org
Off the top of my head i'd say to do it in generality you'd be looking at something like Greens theorem or Stokes theorem (one of them deals with conservative fields can't remember which)
 
We've yet to learn Stokes Theorem, though we have learned Green's theorem. But I don't see how Green's theorem would apply here as it is just a specific case of Stokes Theorem for two dimension (correct?).
 
At a point on the surface of the sphere, think about what direction your force field points.
 
Doesn't that depend on the function f(x,y,z) ? since the force field will change depending on what that function is.
 
f(x,y,z) is a scalar. The direction is going to be parallel to the vector, so...
 
At any point the force would be the vector (f(x,y,z)x , f(x,y,z)y, f(x,y,z)z). Hmm the light bulb still hasn't gone on :(
 
If f was constant what direction would your force field be? Remember f can only change the length of the vector or reverse its direction.
 
The force would be going straight outwards, wouldn't it? with the length modified by f(x,y,z). which would mean it was perpendicular to the curve right?
 
  • #10
Bingo! Well, almost bingo. It might be pointed inward if f was negative at a point. All the scalar f can do is vary the length but the force must always point inward or outward. Now think about what direction you are moving along your surface curve in comparison to the force.
 
  • #11
Well if the force is perpendicular at one point on the surface curve, and the surface is sphere wouldn't the force always be perpendicular to the curve regardless of which curve is chosen.
 
  • #12
Aahhyup! So?
 
  • #13
Well the work done by F would be zero then since it doesn't effect the "particle" when moving from point a on the curve to point b.

I now understand it intuitively. Thank you :) How would i go about proving this though. Would i need to parametrize a curve along the sphere and show that it is perpendicular to the force vector?
 
  • #14
SolidSnake said:
Well the work done by F would be zero then since it doesn't effect the "particle" when moving from point a on the curve to point b.

I now understand it intuitively. Thank you :) How would i go about proving this though. Would i need to parametrize a curve along the sphere and show that it is perpendicular to the force vector?

Aye, there's the rub. The pesky equations. What you have is a curve on the sphere:

[tex]\vec R(t) = \langle x(t),y(t),z(t)\rangle[/tex]

with

[tex]|\vec R(t)| = 1[/tex]

and a force that can be written as

[tex]\vec F = f(\vec R)\vec R[/itex]<br /> <br /> And you need to show<br /> <br /> [tex]W = \int_C \vec F \cdot d\vec R = 0[/tex]<br /> <br /> I'm going leave you to think about that now. Express it in terms of t and see if you can figure out how to get that = 0. You obviously need to use<br /> <br /> [tex]|\vec R(t)| = 1[/tex]<br /> <br /> somehow in your argument, eh? Good luck. Sack time here.[/tex]
 
  • #15
Thanks for the help. Good night :)
 

Similar threads

  • · Replies 8 ·
Replies
8
Views
2K
  • · Replies 8 ·
Replies
8
Views
2K
  • · Replies 3 ·
Replies
3
Views
1K
  • · Replies 5 ·
Replies
5
Views
4K
  • · Replies 21 ·
Replies
21
Views
4K
Replies
14
Views
4K
  • · Replies 3 ·
Replies
3
Views
2K
Replies
10
Views
1K
Replies
3
Views
2K
  • · Replies 8 ·
Replies
8
Views
2K