# The true TFC for surface integrals

• Jhenrique
In summary, the conversation discussed the fundamental theorem of calculus for line integrals and the question of what the corresponding theorem would be for surface integrals. The idea of using Geometric Algebra was brought up, and a book on the subject was recommended. The book was found to discuss the fundamental theorem of calculus for surface integrals, contrary to the initial belief.
Jhenrique
The true FTC for surface integrals

Let's say that ##\vec{f}## is an exact one-form, so we have that ##\vec{f}=\vec{\nabla}f##, and ##\vec{F}## is an exact two-form, so we have that ##\vec{F}=\vec{\nabla}\times \vec{f}##.

The fundamental theorem of calculus for line integral says that: $$\int_{\vec{s}_0}^{\vec{s}_1}\vec{\nabla}f\cdot d\vec{s}=f(\vec{s}_1)-f(\vec{s}_0)$$
Thus, by analogy, how would be the FTC for surface integral? I think that would be something more or less like:
$$\iint_{\vec{S}_0}^{\vec{S}_1}\vec{\nabla}\times \vec{f}\cdot d^2\vec{S}=\vec{f}(\vec{S}_1)-\vec{f}(\vec{S}_0)$$
But, if my deduction is correct, so what is ##\vec{S}##? Well, ##\vec{S}## can't be a vector because a vector have two or three scalar components and your variation, ##\vec{s}_1 - \vec{s}_0## describe a unidimensional manifold (a curve). As we want that the variation of ##\vec{S}## represents a bidimensional manifold (a surface), so is necessary that your components be 2 vectors because two points (two vectors) varying simultaneously describe a surface. This ideia is consistent with the d² of double integral above, because ##\frac{df(x)}{dx} = \frac{f(x_1) - f(x_0)}{dx}##, ##\frac{df(x,y)}{dx} = \frac{f(x_1,y) - f(x_0,y)}{dx}##, ##\frac{d^2f(x,y)}{dxdy} = \frac{f(x_1, y_1) - f(x_0, y_0)}{dxdy}##, so ##d^2 f(x,y) = f(x_1, y_1)-f(x_0, y_0)##. If ##\vec{S}## represents a set of vectors, so ##\vec{S} = (\vec{s}, \vec{t})##. The integral of surface becomes: $$\iint \limits_{\vec{s}_0\vec{t}_0}^{\vec{s}_1\vec{t}_1}\vec{\nabla}\times \vec{F}\cdot d^2\vec{S}=\vec{F}(\vec{s}_1,\vec{t}_1)-\vec{F}(\vec{s}_0,\vec{t}_0)$$ If all this ideia is correct, thus we have a lot of questions! 1st, which is the geometric interpretation for this integral? You can't give the same geometric interpretation as in: $$\oint\!\! \oint_{S} \vec{F}\cdot d^2\vec{S} = \iiint_{V} \vec{\nabla}\times \vec{F}d^3V$$ because this interpretation is the analogous to $$\oint_{s} \vec{f}\cdot d\vec{s} = \iint_{S} \vec{\nabla}\cdot \vec{f}\cdot d^2\vec{S}$$ and not represents the FTC.

2nd place, what hell is actually ##\vec{S}## ? This isn't a vector! Should be a bivector or a tensor.

I think that all is quite something. What you think about?

Last edited:
You seem very interested in vector calculus from a Geometric Algebra perspective.

So am I! Fortunately, a helpful book was just released on the subject. I'm reading through it now.
http://faculty.luther.edu/~macdonal/vagc/

This book promises to show you what the fundamental theorem of calculus looks like in geometric algebra, though I'm not that far in it. So far it's very interesting though!

Happens that this book don't talk about the fundamental theorem of calculus for surface integral, btw, no one coment about this!

Are you sure?

Chapter 10 is called The Fundamental Theorem of Calculus. Looks to me like it discusses surface integrals rather extensively.

I think your deduction and analysis are on the right track. The fundamental theorem of calculus for surface integrals is a bit more complicated than the one for line integrals, as it involves a two-dimensional surface instead of a one-dimensional curve. The notation and interpretation can be a bit confusing, but your understanding of the components of ##\vec{S}## and the need for it to represent a bidimensional manifold is correct.

As for the geometric interpretation, it is not as straightforward as the one for line integrals, as you have mentioned. It involves the flux of the two-form ##\vec{F}## through the surface ##\vec{S}##. The specific interpretation would depend on the physical situation and the specific form of ##\vec{F}##.

In terms of what ##\vec{S}## actually is, it can be thought of as a surface element or a two-dimensional infinitesimal area. It can also be represented as a bivector or a tensor, as you have mentioned.

Overall, your understanding and analysis of the true FTC for surface integrals is correct. However, this is still an area of active research and there may be further developments and refinements in the future. Keep up the good work in exploring and understanding these concepts!

## 1. What is the true TFC for surface integrals?

The true TFC (transformation factor correction) for surface integrals is a mathematical concept that is used to account for the distortion of a surface when it is projected onto a different coordinate system. It is necessary to accurately calculate the surface area or volume of an object when performing surface integrals.

## 2. Why is the true TFC important in surface integrals?

The true TFC is important because it ensures that the surface area or volume calculated in a surface integral is accurate and not distorted due to the change in coordinate system. Without accounting for the true TFC, the results of a surface integral may be incorrect.

## 3. How is the true TFC calculated for surface integrals?

The true TFC is calculated by taking the determinant of the Jacobian matrix of the transformation between the original coordinate system and the new coordinate system. This Jacobian matrix represents the scaling and distortions of the surface in the new coordinate system.

## 4. Can the true TFC be negative?

Yes, the true TFC can be negative. This occurs when the orientation of the surface is flipped in the new coordinate system. In this case, the true TFC will have a negative value, indicating that the surface has been mirrored or flipped in some way.

## 5. How does the true TFC affect the final result of a surface integral?

The true TFC is multiplied by the integrand in the surface integral, and therefore affects the final result by either increasing or decreasing it. If the true TFC is negative, the final result of the surface integral will also be negative, indicating the orientation of the surface has been flipped.

Replies
3
Views
2K
Replies
1
Views
472
Replies
11
Views
3K
Replies
1
Views
2K
Replies
1
Views
626
Replies
14
Views
1K
Replies
9
Views
1K
Replies
4
Views
1K
Replies
4
Views
2K
Replies
3
Views
305