Quick Divergence Theorem question

AI Thread Summary
The discussion revolves around applying the divergence theorem to evaluate the flux of the vector field V through a hemisphere. The divergence of V is calculated as 1, leading to a volume integral over the hemisphere that results in 2πa³/3. Participants express confusion about the distinction between flux and flux density, with some clarifying that the divergence represents flux density. The hint suggests that a direct evaluation of the flux may not be the easiest approach, prompting a discussion on the correct interpretation of the problem. Overall, the thread highlights common misunderstandings in vector calculus, particularly regarding the divergence theorem.
Stef42
Messages
9
Reaction score
0

Homework Statement


Use the divergence theorem in three dimensions

\int\int\int\nabla\bullet V d\tau= \int \int V \bullet n d \sigma

to evaluate the flux of the vector field

V= (3x-2y)i + x4zj + (1-2z)k

through the hemisphere bounded by the spherical surface x2+y2+z2=a2 (for z>0) and the x-y plane

Hint: The direct evauation of the flux may not be the easiest way to proceed

Homework Equations





The Attempt at a Solution


I found it pretty simple which means I probably messed up (and I'm not sure what the hint is talking about
ok so the divergence is
\nabla \bullet V = 3-2=1

and the integral over the volume of the hemisphere (using spherical polar coordinates) is
\int_{0}^a r^2 d \tau \int_{0}^{2\pi} d\phi \int_{0}^{\pi/2} sin\theta d\theta = \frac{2\pi a^3}{3}

So am I doing it completely wrong? I don't know the answer but if anyone could look through it and spot anything I would really appreciate it
 
Physics news on Phys.org
Hi Stef42! :smile:

(have a del: ∇ and a theta: θ and a phi: φ and a sigma: σ and use \cdot instead of \bullet :wink:)
Stef42 said:
Use the divergence theorem in three dimensions

\int\int\int\nabla\bullet V d\tau= \int \int V \bullet n d \sigma

to evaluate the flux of the vector field

Hint: The direct evauation of the flux may not be the easiest way to proceed

I found it pretty simple which means I probably messed up (and I'm not sure what the hint is talking about

Looks fine to me …

I think the hint just means don't use V.n, which is the flux, use ∇.V … though that's a bit unnecessary since they've already told you to :rolleyes:
 
thanks for the speedy response tiny-tim :-)
Ok so just to clear up:
∇.V= divergence of vector field V
V.n= flux
So then the sigma integral is flux density ?
So what did I calculate? flux density aswell? wasn't I supposed to find the flux? :confused:
 
Stef42 said:
So what did I calculate? flux density aswell? wasn't I supposed to find the flux? :confused:

oooh, I get confused between flux and flux density …

anyway, V.n is definitely fluxy, and ∇.V definitely isn't :wink:
 
well, at least I'm not the only one who gets confused, damn vector calculus :frown:
well from my lectures notes:
"The divergence represents the flux density of the vector field and, because of the derivative operation, has an associated Fundamental Theorem of Calculus called the divergence theorem : (quotes equation)"

hmm think I'll go talk to him tomorrow :)
 
Thread 'Collision of a bullet on a rod-string system: query'
In this question, I have a question. I am NOT trying to solve it, but it is just a conceptual question. Consider the point on the rod, which connects the string and the rod. My question: just before and after the collision, is ANGULAR momentum CONSERVED about this point? Lets call the point which connects the string and rod as P. Why am I asking this? : it is clear from the scenario that the point of concern, which connects the string and the rod, moves in a circular path due to the string...
Back
Top