Triple Integral Property: \bigtriangledown \times F

Click For Summary

Homework Help Overview

The discussion revolves around a property of triple integrals in the context of vector calculus, specifically focusing on the curl of a vector field \( F(x,y,z) \) defined over a region \( D \) with a bounding surface \( S \) where the field is perpendicular to the surface. The goal is to show that the integral of the curl over the volume \( D \) equals zero.

Discussion Character

  • Exploratory, Mathematical reasoning, Assumption checking

Approaches and Questions Raised

  • Participants discuss examining each component of the curl of \( F \) and consider using Gauss' Theorem to relate the components to surface integrals. There is an exploration of how to express certain terms as divergences and the implications of the field being perpendicular to the surface.

Discussion Status

The discussion is ongoing with participants sharing their reasoning and approaches. Some guidance has been offered regarding the application of Gauss' Theorem, and there is a recognition of the need to combine terms to draw conclusions about the integral. However, there is no explicit consensus on the final outcome.

Contextual Notes

Participants are navigating the complexities of vector calculus and the implications of boundary conditions on the integral. There is a mention of the challenge in concluding that certain surface integrals equal zero without further justification.

Treadstone 71
Messages
275
Reaction score
0
"Suppose that a smooth vector field [tex]F(x,y,z)[/tex] given on a region [tex]D[/tex] has the property that on the bounding surface [tex]S[/tex] it is perpenticular to the surface. Show that
[tex]\int\int\int_D \bigtriangledown \times F dV = 0[/tex]
in the sense that each component of [tex]\bigtriangledown \times F[/tex] has integral 0 over D."
I'm really stumped on this one.
 
Physics news on Phys.org
You can proceed by examing each component of the curl of F in turn. Take the x component for instance, it looks something like
[tex](\vec{\nabla}\times\vec{F})_x = \frac{\partial F_z}{\partial y} - \frac{\partial F_y}{\partial z}[/tex]. Since integration is linear you can consider each piece in turn. Can you find a way to represent
[tex] \frac{\partial F_z}{\partial y}[/tex]
as a divergence. Hint: to make progress, apply Gauss' Theorem to the result.
 
I suppose you can express it as [tex]\bigtriangledown(0,F_3,0)[/tex] so by Gauss's theorem,

[tex]\int\int\int_D\bigtriangledown(0,F_3,0)dV=\int\int_{\partial D}(0,F_3,0)d\vec{S}[/tex].

If the field were tangent to the surface, the dot product between the normal vector and it would be zero, but since it's already perpenticular...
 
You aren't quite there yet, but you're close. In particular, you can't just conclude that
[tex]\int\int _{\partial D}(0,F_3,0)d\vec{S}[/tex]
equals zero. However, when you combine this term with the other term in the curl, then maybe you can say something ...
 
It boils down to

[tex]\int\int \bigtriangledown(0,F_3,0)-\bigtriangledown(0,0,F_2)\vec{N}dS[/tex]

The integrand becomes

[tex]\bigtriangledown(0,F_3,F_2)\vec{N}[/tex]

Since the normal is parallel to the field, it becomes (F3F2-F2F3)|N|, and this is 0.

Did I get this right? If so thanks for the help!
 
Last edited:
I don't know why you have the gradient operator still there, but yes, you've pretty much got it.
 

Similar threads

  • · Replies 9 ·
Replies
9
Views
3K
  • · Replies 2 ·
Replies
2
Views
2K
  • · Replies 7 ·
Replies
7
Views
3K
  • · Replies 1 ·
Replies
1
Views
2K
  • · Replies 6 ·
Replies
6
Views
3K
  • · Replies 16 ·
Replies
16
Views
3K
Replies
6
Views
3K
Replies
9
Views
2K
  • · Replies 1 ·
Replies
1
Views
2K
  • · Replies 3 ·
Replies
3
Views
2K