Surface integral with differential forms

Click For Summary
The discussion revolves around integrating the scalar function f(x,y,z) = z^2 over the top half of the unit sphere using two methods: traditional surface integrals and differential forms. The first method correctly evaluates the surface integral, yielding a result of 2π/3 by applying the appropriate formula and accounting for the projection of tangent vectors. In contrast, the second method using differential forms results in a different value of π/2 because it incorrectly applies dx ∧ dy as the surface element instead of the correct dS. Clarification is provided that the discrepancy arises from the different interpretations of the surface element in each approach. The conclusion emphasizes the importance of using the correct surface element when applying differential forms in integration.
gts87
Messages
6
Reaction score
0
Hi, I'm trying to solve a problem in David Bachman's Geometric Approach to Differential Forms (teaching myself.) The problem is to integrate the scalar function f(x,y,z) = z^2 over the top half of the unit sphere centered at the origin, parameterized by \phi(r,\theta) = (rcos\theta, rsin\theta, \sqrt{1 - r^2}), 0 \leq r \leq 1, 0 \leq \theta \leq 2\pi. I think we can evaluate this surface integral using the formula \int\int_{S}f(x,y,z)dS = \int\int_{D}f(\phi(r, \theta))|\phi_{r}\times\phi_{\theta}|drd\theta yielding:

<br /> \int^{2\pi}_{0}\int^{1}_{0}(1-r^2)|\partial\phi/\partial r \times \partial\phi/\partial\theta| dr d\theta<br />

<br /> \int^{2\pi}_{0}\int^{1}_{0}(1-r^2)|&lt;r^2cos\theta/\sqrt{1 - r^2}, r^2sin\theta/\sqrt{1 - r^2}, r&gt;| dr d\theta<br />


<br /> \int^{2\pi}_{0}\int^{1}_{0}(1-r^2)\sqrt{(r^4cos^2\theta + r^4sin^2\theta)/(1 - r^2) + r^2} dr d\theta<br />


<br /> \int^{2\pi}_{0}\int^{1}_{0}(1-r^2)\sqrt{(r^2/(1 - r^2)} dr d\theta<br />


<br /> \int^{2\pi}_{0}d\theta\int^{1}_{0}r\sqrt{1 - r^2} dr = 2\pi/3<br />

However, using differential forms, if we let \omega = z^2 dx \wedge dy and use the same parameterization to integrate \omega over the mentioned manifold, we get

\int_{M}\omega = \int_{D}(1 - r^2)\cdot(\partial\phi/\partial r, \partial\phi/\partial\theta)dx \wedge dy (Here \partial\phi/\partial r, \partial\phi/\partial\theta are the tangent vectors being acted on by dx \wedge dy)


\int_{D}(1 - r^2) det[cos\theta \; -rsin\theta , \; \; sin\theta \; rcos\theta]drd\theta (the matrix rows are separated by the comma.)

\int^{2\pi}_{0}\int^{1}_{0}(1 - r^2)(r)drd\theta = \pi/2

Am I doing something wrong? If anyone can help I'd appreciate it, thanks!
 
Physics news on Phys.org
Hi!
In the first case you are doing nothing more than integrating the form f(\phi(r,\theta))\:\phi^*[dr\wedge d\theta]=f(\phi(r,\theta)) dS acting on the vectors \partial_r\phi,\:\partial_{\theta}\phi (here \phi^{*} represents the pushforward of a form). This corresponds to projecting the tangent vectors \partial_r\phi,\:\partial_{\theta}\phi to the plane (x,y) and then integrating on the disk 0 \leq r \leq 1, 0 \leq \theta \leq 2\pi, with the factor |\partial\phi/\partial r \times \partial\phi/\partial\theta| accounting for the deformation due to projection to the horizontal plane. So this is the right result.

In the second case you are integrating f\;dx\wedge dy, but dx\wedge dy is not the surface element dS. Thus the result is different.
 

Similar threads

Replies
3
Views
3K
  • · Replies 6 ·
Replies
6
Views
3K
  • · Replies 6 ·
Replies
6
Views
3K
  • · Replies 3 ·
Replies
3
Views
4K
  • · Replies 1 ·
Replies
1
Views
3K
  • · Replies 12 ·
Replies
12
Views
4K
  • · Replies 1 ·
Replies
1
Views
1K
  • · Replies 19 ·
Replies
19
Views
2K
  • · Replies 0 ·
Replies
0
Views
2K
  • · Replies 4 ·
Replies
4
Views
3K