Symmetry of an Integral of a Dot product

Click For Summary
The discussion centers on justifying why the integral $$\int\int_{-\infty}^{\infty}drdr'W(\vec{r})W(\vec{r'}) \vec{r} \cdot \vec{r'}=0$$ holds true, as stated in a research paper. The key argument involves recognizing that the integral must account for the angular dependence of the dot product, specifically integrating over the full range of angles from 0 to 2π. This leads to the conclusion that the integral of cos(φ - φ') over a complete period results in zero due to symmetry. Additionally, the participants clarify the importance of maintaining vector notation throughout the calculations, emphasizing that the integration variables should remain consistent. Ultimately, the integral evaluates to zero, confirming the assumption made in the original paper.
Skaiserollz89
Messages
9
Reaction score
0
Homework Statement
Show that $$\int\int_{-\infty}^{\infty}d\vec{r}d\vec{r'}W(\vec{r})W(\vec{r'}) \vec{r} \cdot \vec{r'}=0$$ due to symmetry. Here, $$W(\vec{r})$$ is a circle function with a value of one inside its radius R and 0 beyond the radius R. Note that ##\vec{r} \cdot \vec{r'}=|\vec{r}| |\vec{r'}|cos(\phi)##, where ##\phi## is the angle between vectors ##\vec{r}## and ##\vec{r'}##.
Relevant Equations
$$\int\int_{-\infty}^{\infty}drdr'W(\vec{r})W(\vec{r'}) \vec{r} \cdot \vec{r'}=0 ;$$
$$\vec{r}=r_x\hat{i}+r_y\hat{y};$$
$$\vec{r'}=r'_x\hat{i}+r'_y\hat{y};$$
This homework statement comes from a research paper that was published in SPIE Optical Engineering. The integral $$\int\int_{-\infty}^{\infty}drdr'W(\vec{r})W(\vec{r'}) \vec{r} \cdot \vec{r'}=0$$ is an assumtion that is made via the following statement from the paper : "Since ##\int\int_{-\infty}^{\infty}drdr'W(\vec{r})W(\vec{r'}) \vec{r} \cdot \vec{r'}=0## , terms that are functions of either ##\vec{r}## or ##\vec{r'}##, and not both, can be added without changing the result of the integration. "

I am just trying to justify how the integral equals zero.

My attempt:

$$\int\int_{-\infty}^{\infty}d\vec{r}d\vec{r'}W(\vec{r})W(\vec{r'}) \vec{r} \cdot \vec{r' };$$ where ##W(\vec{r})=0## when ##r>R## and
##W(\vec{r})=1## when ##r\le R.##

Here I change my integration bounds to reflect the constrains of ##W(\vec{r})## and ##W(\vec{r'})##.

$$\int_{0}^{R}\int_{0}^{R}d\vec{r}d\vec{r'} \vec{r} \cdot \vec{r'}$$

$$\int_{0}^{R}\int_{0}^{R}d\vec{r}d\vec{r'} |\vec{r}| |\vec{r'}|cos(\phi)$$

$$cos(\phi) \int_{0}^{R}|\vec{r}|dr\int_{0}^{R} r'dr'$$

$$cos(\phi) \int_{0}^{R}r dr\int_{0}^{R}r' dr'$$

$$cos(\phi)(\frac{1}{2}R^2)(\frac{1}{2}R^2)$$

$$=\frac{R^4}{4}cos(\phi)$$

Im not sure If I am skipping steps or missing the point all together, but I dont see how this will go to zero. Any assistant and guidance would be greatly appreciated so I might be able to understand this paper I am reading a little bit more.
 
Last edited:
Physics news on Phys.org
In terms of plane polar coordinates (r,\phi) and (r,\phi') you have \theta = \phi - \phi'. To integrate over a circle in the (r',\phi') you must not only integrate with respect to r' from 0 to R, but also with respect to \phi' between 0 and 2\pi. The integral of \cos(\phi - \phi') over a complete period of 2\pi is zero, so the entire integral is zero.
 
pasmith said:
In terms of plane polar coordinates (r,\phi) and (r,\phi') you have \theta = \phi - \phi'. To integrate over a circle in the (r',\phi') you must not only integrate with respect to r' from 0 to R, but also with respect to \phi' between 0 and 2\pi. The integral of \cos(\phi - \phi') over a complete period of 2\pi is zero, so the entire integral is zero.
So the statement in the published paper is assuming that integration with respect to ##\phi## must also be performed for it to go to zero, without explicitly saying so?
 
Skaiserollz89 said:
So the statement in the published paper is assuming that integration with respect to ##\phi## must also be performed for it to go to zero, without explicitly saying so?
The original integral you wrote has integration variables ##\vec r## and ##\vec r'##. That's not the same as ##r## and ##r'## as you later wrote.
 
vela said:
The original integral you wrote has integration variables ##\vec r## and ##\vec r'##. That's not the same as ##r## and ##r'## as you later wrote.
I agree. After performing the dot product I am working with scalars at that point, correct? So ##d\vec r## and ##d\vec r'## goes to ##dr## and ##dr'##? Do you think I am missing something?
 
Skaiserollz89 said:
I agree. After performing the dot product I am working with scalars at that point, correct?
No, that's not correct. The dot product makes the integrand a scalar, but that has no bearing on the region over which you're integrating.
 
vela said:
No, that's not correct. The dot product makes the integrand a scalar, but that has no bearing on the region over which you're integrating.
Thank you for clarifying. But I think I am a little confused. Would you mind elaborating? I think you are saying that my line that reads ##cos(\phi) \int_{0}^{R}r dr\int_{0}^{R}r' dr'## is incorrect, and should be ##cos(\phi) \int_{0}^{R}r d\vec{r}\int_{0}^{R}r'd\vec{r'}## which simplifies to

$$cos(\phi) \int_{0}^{R}r \hat{r}d{r}\int_{0}^{R}r'\hat{r'}d{r'}.$$

If this notation is correct, how do I continue on from here?
 
Last edited:
In two dimensions, the area element ##d\vec r## is equal to ##dx\,dy## in Cartesian coordinates or ##r\,dr\,d\phi## in polar coordinates. (You could, of course, swap the order of ##x## and ##y## or ##r## and ##\theta##.) The advantage of ##d\vec r## is that the notation is independent of any choice of coordinate system.

Here's a simple example:
$$\int (\vec r \cdot \hat i)\,d\vec r = \iint (\vec r \cdot \hat i)\,r\,dr\,d\phi= \iint (\vec r \cdot \hat i)\,dx\,dy$$ Then you can evaluate the dot product in whatever way is convenient and appropriate for the problem, e.g.,
$$\int (\vec r \cdot \hat i)\,d\vec r = \iint (r\cos\phi)\,r\,dr\,d\phi= \iint x\,dx\,dy$$
 
  • Like
Likes Skaiserollz89
Great! I think I've got it now. Ill attempt to work it through here...

Given the initial problem
$$ \int_{-\infty}^{\infty}\int_{-\infty}^{\infty}d\vec{r}d\vec{r'}W(\vec{r})W(\vec{r'}) \vec{r} \cdot \vec{r'}$$

It seems like you are referring to Green's Theorem to turn a line integral into a double integral.

From your example, and from the constraints of ##W(r)## and ##W(r')## on the radius I have...

$$\int_{0}^{R}\int_{0}^{2\pi}\int_{0}^{R}\int_{0}^{2\pi} rdrd\phi r'dr'd\phi' |\vec{r}| |\vec{r'}| cos(\phi-\phi') ,$$

where ##\phi-\phi'## is the angle between the two vectors ##\vec{r}## and ##\vec{r'}##. Separating terms I have

$$\int_{0}^{R}r^2dr \int_{0}^{R}r'^2dr'\int_{0}^{2\pi}\int_{0}^{2\pi} d\phi d\phi' cos(\phi-\phi') ,$$

Noting the trig identity that ##cos(\phi-\phi')=cos(\phi)cos(\phi')+sin(\phi)sin(\phi')##,
$$\int_{0}^{R}r^2dr \int_{0}^{R}r'^2dr'\left[\int_{0}^{2\pi}\int_{0}^{2\pi} d\phi d\phi' cos(\phi)cos(\phi')+ \int_{0}^{2\pi}\int_{0}^{2\pi} d\phi d\phi'sin(\phi)sin(\phi')\right] ,$$

$$\int_{0}^{R}r^2dr \int_{0}^{R}r'^2dr'\left[\int_{0}^{2\pi}cos(\phi)d\phi\int_{0}^{2\pi} cos(\phi')d\phi'+ \int_{0}^{2\pi}sin(\phi)d\phi\int_{0}^{2\pi} sin(\phi')d\phi'\right] ,$$

where the terms in the square brackets all individually go to zero due to symmetry in the integration over the entire period of the function, namely...
$$\int_{0}^{2\pi}cos(\phi)d\phi=0 \hspace{.5cm}\text{ and }\hspace{.5cm} \int_{0}^{2\pi}sin(\phi)d\phi=0.$$

Therefore;
$$\int_{-\infty}^{\infty}\int_{-\infty}^{\infty}d\vec{r}d\vec{r'}W(\vec{r})W(\vec{r'}) \vec{r} \cdot \vec{r'}=0$$
 
  • #10
Easier is \begin{split}<br /> \int_0^{2\pi}\int_0^{2\pi} \cos(\phi - \phi&#039;)\,d\phi\,d\phi&#039; &amp;= \int_0^{2\pi}\left[ \sin(\phi-\phi&#039;) \right]_{\phi=0}^{\phi = 2\pi}\,d\phi&#039; \\<br /> &amp;= \int_0^{2\pi}\sin(2\pi - \phi&#039;) - \sin (-\phi&#039;)\,d\phi&#039; \\<br /> &amp;= \int_0^{2\pi}0\,d\phi&#039; \\ &amp;= 0.\end{split}