jasc15 said:
Its not one particular problem, but what spurred my question was learning about calculating the flux of a vector field \int_S\vec{E}\cdot d\vec{a} where the differential area of surface S is a vector with both magnitude (geometric area) and direction. How can the area at a point on a surface have any magnitude?
Ah. I think I see what you're getting at.
The "da" in the equation you gave is still a vector. It has a definite direction, and that direction is always normal to the surface.
Suppose we have a sphere of radius 1 we want to approximate. One way to do this would be to approximate our sphere with 6 tangent planes... imagine sticking it snugly inside a cube. Each surface on the cube has an area of 2. The total area is 6 x 2 = 12, which is of course a very rough approximation of there sphere's actual surface area: 4*pi*r^2 = 4*pi.
What are the "da"'s in our cube approximation? They are the (unit) normals to each surface scaled by the area of the surface. That means the top face is a vector pointing up with a length of 2. The one on the opposite side is a vector pointing down with a length of 2.
Let's put this sphere in a uniform field F(x, y) = (0, -1). What is the flux?
Let's use a Riemann style approach. Take our cube approximation of the sphere. There are four "da" sections (those vectors we talked about above).
For the top side, the normal is (0, 2). (Note how the total length is 2 and the direction is up along the straight up along the y-axis). The dot product between the field and this "da" is (0, 1) * (0, 2) = 2.
Similarly, for the bottom side, the normal is (0, -2). The dot product between this side and the field is (0, 1) * (0, -2) = -2.
For the remaining four sides, the normal will be at a right angle to the field F. The dot product between orthogonal vectors (vectors at right angles) is zero, so the remaining terms are all 0.
Our (approximate) flux in this field is thus 2 + -2 + 0 + 0 + 0 + 0 = 0.
Now, 0 is the actual answer for a sphere, because our situation was so simple. But in general, if you wanted a better approximation, you'd have to use a more complicated shape. You might use an octrahedron, a dodecahedron, or a icosidodecahedron to approximate our sphere. There will be more surface normals to consider (more "da"s) but at the same time, their individual areas will be much smaller. Also, the direction of each normal will not be as easy to calculate, and you probably need to start plugging things into a calculator or a computer program.
Cvan said:
Hope it's right too, have a test in like 4 hours on it.
lol =-D