Surface Integral Homework: Is the Author's Solution Wrong?

fonseh
Messages
521
Reaction score
2

Homework Statement


Is the solution provided by the author wrong ? Stokes theorem is used to calculate the line integral of vector filed , am i right ?

Homework Equations

The Attempt at a Solution


To find the surface integral of many different planes in a solid , we need to use Gauss theorem , right ?
 

Attachments

  • 492.JPG
    492.JPG
    17.8 KB · Views: 452
  • 490.JPG
    490.JPG
    26.4 KB · Views: 470
  • 491.JPG
    491.JPG
    28.4 KB · Views: 443
Physics news on Phys.org
The author doesn't seem to specify what surface integral he is asking for. If he wants ## \int F \cdot dA ##, Gauss' law works for the surface enclosing a volume, and wouldn't apply here. If he wants you to evaluate ## \int \nabla \times F \cdot \, dA ##, you can use Stokes theorem and alternatively compute the line integral of ## \oint F \cdot \, ds ## around the perimeter. ## \\ ## editing... If the author wants you to evaluate ## \int F \cdot \, dA ##, there are no shortcuts that I know of=neither Gauss' law or Stokes theorem will apply. You simply need to crank it out the long way... And none of us are infallible=it is my guess the author made a mistake.
 
Last edited:
  • Like
Likes fonseh
Charles Link said:
The author doesn't seem to specify what surface integral he is asking for. If he wants ## \int F \cdot dA ##, Gauss' law works for the surface enclosing a volume, and wouldn't apply here. If he wants you to evaluate ## \int \nabla \times F \cdot \, dA ##, you can use Stokes theorem and alternatively compute the line integral of ## \oint F \cdot \, ds ## around the perimeter. ## \\ ## editing... If the author wants you to evaluate ## \int F \cdot \, dA ##, there are no shortcuts that I know of=neither Gauss' law or Stokes theorem will apply. You simply need to crank it out the long way... And none of us are infallible=it is my guess the author made a mistake.
Do you mean that the author maybe mean find the line integral and not find surface integral in this question ?
 
fonseh said:
Do you mean that the author maybe mean find the line integral and not find surface integral in this question ?
Frequently in such problems the author wants you to demonstrate Stokes' theorem by working it both ways. It's a learning thing.
 
There are two things I don't understand about this problem. First, when finding the nth root of a number, there should in theory be n solutions. However, the formula produces n+1 roots. Here is how. The first root is simply ##\left(r\right)^{\left(\frac{1}{n}\right)}##. Then you multiply this first root by n additional expressions given by the formula, as you go through k=0,1,...n-1. So you end up with n+1 roots, which cannot be correct. Let me illustrate what I mean. For this...
Back
Top