Using Stokes' Theorem for Hemispherical Surface Area Calculation

  • Thread starter Thread starter sci-doo
  • Start date Start date
  • Tags Tags
    Stokes Theorem
sci-doo
Messages
23
Reaction score
0

Homework Statement


Calculate
\int \int _{S}\nabla \times \overline{F} \cdot \hat{N}dS

where \overline{F} = 3y\hat{i} - 2xz\hat{j} + (x^{2}-y^{2})\hat{k} and S is a
hemispherical surface x2 + y2 + z2 = a2, z ≥ 0 and \hat{N} is a normal of the surface outwards. Can you use Stokes' theorem?

Homework Equations


I think I can use Stokes' theorem

\int \int _{S}\nabla \times \overline{F} \cdot \hat{N}dS = \oint_{C} \overline{F} \cdot d\overline{r}

The Attempt at a Solution



\oint_{C} \overline{F} \cdot d\overline{r} = \oint_{C} 3y\hat{i} - 2xz\hat{j} + (x^{2}-y^{2})\hat{k} \cdot (dx\hat{i} + dy\hat{j} + dz\hat{k})
= \oint_{C} (3y dx - 2xz dy + (x^{2}-y^{2})dz)

I don't know how to continue!

I should probably integrate closed line C that is the perimeter curve of the surface (circle radius a), but I have no further idea how to do that. I'm new to this subject and I simply don't understand what I could do/write .. :cry:

Help is highly appreciated!
 
Last edited:
Physics news on Phys.org
Odd, most people learn how to integrate on curves before getting to Stokes' theorem.

The circle of radius a, in the xy-plane can be written in terms of the parameter \theta as
x= a cos(\theta)
y= a sin(\theta)
z= 0.

dx= -a sin(\theta)d\theta
dy= a cos(\theta)d\theta
dz= 0
 
HallsofIvy said:
Odd, most people learn how to integrate on curves before getting to Stokes' theorem.
:smile:
HallsofIvy said:
The circle of radius a, in the xy-plane can be written in terms of the parameter \theta as
x= a cos(\theta)
y= a sin(\theta)
z= 0.

dx= -a sin(\theta)d\theta
dy= a cos(\theta)d\theta
dz= 0

Ok, I got a solution -3a2pi

What I did I made
\overline{r}(t) = a cos t + a sin t where 0 \leq t \leq 2 \pi

and then dot product of F(r) and r'(t)

I integrated that from 0 to 2pi with respect to t.

Can I somehow expect a negative result?
 
There are two things I don't understand about this problem. First, when finding the nth root of a number, there should in theory be n solutions. However, the formula produces n+1 roots. Here is how. The first root is simply ##\left(r\right)^{\left(\frac{1}{n}\right)}##. Then you multiply this first root by n additional expressions given by the formula, as you go through k=0,1,...n-1. So you end up with n+1 roots, which cannot be correct. Let me illustrate what I mean. For this...
Back
Top