Triple Integral in Spherical Coordinates

Click For Summary

Homework Help Overview

The discussion revolves around evaluating a triple integral by converting to spherical coordinates. Participants are exploring the appropriate limits of integration and the transformation of Cartesian coordinates to spherical coordinates.

Discussion Character

  • Exploratory, Assumption checking, Conceptual clarification

Approaches and Questions Raised

  • Participants discuss the transformation of coordinates and the corresponding limits of integration. Questions arise regarding the correctness of the limits and the integrand expression. There is also a focus on understanding the implications of negative radii and the angles involved in spherical coordinates.

Discussion Status

The discussion is active, with participants providing insights and questioning each other's reasoning. Some guidance has been offered regarding the limits of integration and the transformation process, but there is no explicit consensus on the correct limits or integrand yet.

Contextual Notes

Participants are navigating the complexities of spherical coordinates, including the definitions and constraints of angles and radii. There is an emphasis on understanding the geometric implications of the chosen limits.

BrownianMan
Messages
133
Reaction score
0
a391a6bc32586652451a6c2272a9bc.gif


Evaluate the integral by changing to spherical coordinates.

Not sure how to go about figuring out the limits of integration when changing to spherical coordinates.
 
Physics news on Phys.org
Do you know how to express x, y and z as functions of spherical coordinates?

Start there...
 
I get,

0 <= theta <= pi
0 <= phi <= pi/4
-2 <= rho <= 2

and for the integrand, I get rho^5 * cos(phi) * sin(phi).

Is this right?
 
Your answer is close to what I get, but I would get different limits of integration.

For the transformation, I would use:

x = r \sin \theta \cos \phi

y = r \sin \theta \sin \phi

z = r\cos \theta

If you work out the "integrand", I get:

r^3 \cos \theta

but then we're integrating the volume element, which in spherical coordinates works out to: r^2\sin \theta dr d\theta d\phi, so the full quantity under the integral sign would be:

r^5 \sin \theta \cos \theta dr d\theta d\phi

which I think is what you got.

I would just say:

(a) I don't think you can have "negative" radii;
(b) I'm not sure where your phi = pi/4 comes from.

So check the limits of integration...
 
Would it be,

0 <= theta <= 2pi
0 <= phi <= 2pi
0 <= rho <= 2
 
The radius limits are correct.

We start at 0, and move out to a radius of 2.

For the angle limits, consider the following:

Start at the origin (0,0,0) and move up the z-axis to 2: (0,0,2).

Now, move the radius vector "down" (i.e, rotate it), until instead of pointing "up", it's now pointing along the "down" axis, i.e., it's at (0,0,-2)... Two questions:

(a) which angle did we just rotate through? (i.e., phi or theta?)
(b) by how many radians did we rotate through?

Now we've created a "half disk", but in order to get the full sphere, we still need to rotate it through the other angle. Soo... let's do that, and by how many radians do we rotate it this time?

You have the right idea, but I think using the limits that you're using, you'll get an answer that 2x too big.

Of course, I'm not sure it matters in this particular case since I think the integral works out to 0, and 2x0 is still 0.

But it's good to understand the fundamentals of why things are the way they are.
 

Similar threads

  • · Replies 7 ·
Replies
7
Views
2K
  • · Replies 7 ·
Replies
7
Views
3K
  • · Replies 15 ·
Replies
15
Views
3K
  • · Replies 9 ·
Replies
9
Views
3K
  • · Replies 2 ·
Replies
2
Views
3K
  • · Replies 5 ·
Replies
5
Views
2K
  • · Replies 4 ·
Replies
4
Views
3K
  • · Replies 4 ·
Replies
4
Views
2K
  • · Replies 2 ·
Replies
2
Views
2K
Replies
3
Views
2K