Stokes' Theorem: Evaluating a Surface Integral on a Hemisphere

  • Thread starter Thread starter JaysFan31
  • Start date Start date
  • Tags Tags
    Stokes Theorem
JaysFan31
Here's my problem:
Take u=(x^3)+(y^3)+(z^2) and v=x+y+z and evaluate the surface integral
double integral of grad(u) x grad(v) ndS where x is the cross product and between the cross product and the ndS there should be a dot product sign. The region S is the hemisphere x^2+y^2+z^2=1 with z greater than or equal to 0 and n has non-negative k component.

Here's my work:
grad(u)=(3x^2)i-(3y^2)j+(2z)k
grad(v)= i+j+k
grad(u) x grad (v)= (-3y^2-2z)i+(2z-3x^2)j+(3x^2-3y^2)k

curl F * k = (-6x+6y)
Thus I=double integral of curl F * ndS = double integral of curl F *k dA = double integral of (-6x+6y)dA.

I used polar coordinates:
-6 integral from 0 to 2pi integral from 0 to 1 (rcost-rsint) rdrdt. However, this integral equals zero. Is this right?

Is this flux zero?
 
on Phys.org
JaysFan31 said:
Here's my problem:
Take u=(x^3)+(y^3)+(z^2) and v=x+y+z and evaluate the surface integral
double integral of grad(u) x grad(v) ndS where x is the cross product and between the cross product and the ndS there should be a dot product sign.
Is this what you mean: [tex]\int\int\nabla u \times\nabla v \cdot \bold{n}dS[/tex]?

The region S is the hemisphere x^2+y^2+z^2=1 with z greater than or equal to 0 and n has non-negative k component.

Here's my work:
grad(u)=(3x^2)i-(3y^2)j+(2z)k
Where does the minus sign in front of the j component come from? [tex]\nabla u=\frac{\partial u}{\partial x}\bold{i}+\frac{\partial u}{\partial y}\bold{j}+\frac{\partial u}{\partial z}\bold{k}[/tex]
grad(v)= i+j+k
grad(u) x grad (v)= (-3y^2-2z)i+(2z-3x^2)j+(3x^2-3y^2)k
These look correct with the amended form for grad(u)

curl F * k = (-6x+6y)
Thus I=double integral of curl F * ndS = double integral of curl F *k dA = double integral of (-6x+6y)dA.
What's F? You should define anything you introduce. I imagine you've used Stokes' Theorem here, but where?

[As an aside, it would be helpful if you could learn LaTex; it's very simple to learn! Click on one of the images in my text, and follow the link to the tutorial]
 
Last edited:
I think I would agree the total flux is zero, but I don't see how you are getting it. What does the stated problem have to do with Stokes Theorem? Where did the curl come from? What is F?
 
Yes, the integral that cristo wrote is what I'm looking for.

Can't I just let F=grad(u) x grad (v)= (-3y^2-2z)i+(2z-3x^2)j+(3x^2-3y^2)k?

I made a mistake. u should equal (x^3)-(y^3)+(z^2). That's why I have a negative j component.

If I let F equal the above, isn't this correct?
 
You are integrating F. Not curl(F). So you can't take it to a line integral.
 
See my post to your latest question. grad(u)xgrad(v) is the curl of something. What?
 

Similar threads

Replies
5
Views
2K
Replies
10
Views
2K
Replies
6
Views
2K
Replies
7
Views
2K
  • · Replies 5 ·
Replies
5
Views
4K
  • · Replies 1 ·
Replies
1
Views
2K
Replies
11
Views
4K
  • · Replies 5 ·
Replies
5
Views
3K
  • · Replies 19 ·
Replies
19
Views
5K
Replies
4
Views
2K