Solving an Integral Problem Using Green's Theorem

Click For Summary

Discussion Overview

The discussion revolves around the application of Green's Theorem to a specific integral problem involving functions \(G\), \(H\), and \(f\) that depend on variables \(x_1\) and \(x_2\). Participants are attempting to prove an equality between a line integral and a double integral, exploring the implications of applying Green's Theorem.

Discussion Character

  • Technical explanation, Mathematical reasoning, Debate/contested

Main Points Raised

  • One participant presents an integral expression and states difficulty in proving the equality using Green's Theorem.
  • Another participant suggests applying the product rule to the derivatives involved in the integrals.
  • A later reply elaborates on the application of the product rule, breaking down the derivatives of the product of functions.
  • Further discussion reveals a potential sign error in the manipulation of the integrals, leading to uncertainty about the correctness of the original problem statement.
  • One participant expresses a belief that the initial question may contain a mistake based on the derived expressions.

Areas of Agreement / Disagreement

Participants do not reach a consensus on the correctness of the original problem or the derived expressions. There is acknowledgment of a possible mistake in the initial question, but no definitive resolution is reached regarding the equality being discussed.

Contextual Notes

The discussion involves complex manipulations of integrals and derivatives, with participants noting potential errors in signs and assumptions about the functions involved. The exact conditions under which the equality holds remain unclear.

Usagi
Messages
38
Reaction score
0
http://img546.imageshack.us/img546/3171/integralbo.jpg

For the above expression, I was told that it can be proven using Green's Theorem on the line integral on the RHS, however I can't seem the prove the equality.

Note that $G$, $H$, $f$ are functions of $x_1$ and $x_2$.

So I apply Green's Theorem:

$\displaystyle{\oint_C f\left(Gdx_1 - H dx_2\right) = \oint_C fG dx_1 + \left(-fH\right)dx_2 = \iint_D -\frac{\partial \left(fH\right)}{\partial x_1} - \frac{\partial \left(fG\right)}{\partial x_2} dA}$

But then what? I can't seem to get the RHS to equal the LHS.

Any help would be appreciated :)
 
Physics news on Phys.org
Usagi said:
http://img546.imageshack.us/img546/3171/integralbo.jpg

For the above expression, I was told that it can be proven using Green's Theorem on the line integral on the RHS, however I can't seem the prove the equality.

Note that $G$, $H$, $f$ are functions of $x_1$ and $x_2$.

So I apply Green's Theorem:

$\displaystyle{\oint_C f\left(Gdx_1 - H dx_2\right) = \oint_C fG dx_1 + \left(-fH\right)dx_2 = \iint_D -\frac{\partial \left(fH\right)}{\partial x_1} - \frac{\partial \left(fG\right)}{\partial x_2} dA}$

But then what? I can't seem to get the RHS to equal the LHS.

Any help would be appreciated :)
This is just the product rule: $\dfrac{\partial(fH)}{\partial x_1} = \dfrac{\partial f}{\partial x_1}H + f\dfrac{\partial H}{\partial x_1}$ and $\dfrac{\partial (fG)}{\partial x_2} = \dfrac{\partial f}{\partial x_2}G + f\dfrac{\partial G}{\partial x_2}.$
 
Opalg said:
This is just the product rule: $\dfrac{\partial(fH)}{\partial x_1} = \dfrac{\partial f}{\partial x_1}H + f\dfrac{\partial H}{\partial x_1}$ and $\dfrac{\partial (fG)}{\partial x_2} = \dfrac{\partial f}{\partial x_2}G + f\dfrac{\partial G}{\partial x_2}.$

Thanks, Yup I did that however how does it simplify down the RHS to equal the LHS?
 
Usagi said:
Thanks, Yup I did that however how does it simplify down the RHS to equal the LHS?
$$\begin{aligned}\oint_C f(Gdx_1 - H dx_2) &= \iint_D \Bigl(-\frac{\partial (fH)}{\partial x_1} - \frac{\partial (fG)}{\partial x_2}\Bigr)\, dA \\ &= \iint_D \Bigl(-\dfrac{\partial f}{\partial x_1}H - f\dfrac{\partial H}{\partial x_1} - \dfrac{\partial f}{\partial x_2}G - f\dfrac{\partial G}{\partial x_2} \Bigr)\,dA \\ &= \iint_D \Bigl(-f\Bigl[\dfrac{\partial H}{\partial x_1} + \dfrac{\partial G}{\partial x_2}\Bigr] -\Bigl[G\dfrac{\partial f}{\partial x_2} + H\dfrac{\partial f}{\partial x_1}\Bigr]\Bigr)\,dA, \end{aligned}$$ from which it appears that $$\iint_D\Bigl[G\dfrac{\partial f}{\partial x_2} + H\dfrac{\partial f}{\partial x_1}\Bigr]\,dA = -\iint_D f\Bigl[\dfrac{\partial H}{\partial x_1} + \dfrac{\partial G}{\partial x_2}\Bigr]\,dA -\oint_C f(Gdx_1 - H dx_2). $$ Hmm, it looks as though the sign of that last term is wrong – not sure where that happened (or maybe the original problem had the wrong sign).
 
Awesome, thanks Opalg, I had a feeling the initial question had a mistake in it :)
 

Similar threads

  • · Replies 4 ·
Replies
4
Views
2K
Replies
3
Views
2K
  • · Replies 14 ·
Replies
14
Views
3K
  • · Replies 3 ·
Replies
3
Views
3K
  • · Replies 4 ·
Replies
4
Views
2K
  • · Replies 4 ·
Replies
4
Views
3K
  • · Replies 2 ·
Replies
2
Views
3K
  • · Replies 1 ·
Replies
1
Views
2K
  • · Replies 7 ·
Replies
7
Views
2K
Replies
6
Views
2K