How to Use Vector Analysis Identity to Solve a Closed Loop Integral?

AI Thread Summary
The discussion focuses on demonstrating the equation a=(1/2) closed loop integral over [r x dl] using vector analysis and Stokes' theorem. Participants explore the identity involving the surface integral and closed loop integral, noting that the right-hand side matches the required expression. A key point is the derivation of the identity involving the gradient of V, which is confirmed to work when V is set to r. The conversation highlights an alternative approach by dotting with a constant vector and applying Stokes' theorem, leading to a simpler solution. Overall, the method discussed effectively resolves the problem using vector calculus principles.
neelakash
Messages
491
Reaction score
1

Homework Statement



we are to show a=(1/2) closed loop integral over [r x dl]

Homework Equations





The Attempt at a Solution



I suppose this can be done formally from the alternative form of Stokes' theorem that can be obtained by replacing the vector field in curl theorem by VxC where C is a constant vector

The identity is :

surface int [(da x grad) x V]=closed loop integral over [dl x V]

The RHS matches.But how to show that LHS leads to the required value?
 
Physics news on Phys.org
There is an identity:
\oint{\bf dr\times V}={\bf \int(\nabla V )\cdot dS<br /> - \int dS(\nabla\cdot V)}.
This can be derived by dotting the left hand side by a constatn vector, and then applying Stokes' theorem.
Applying this with V=r works.
 
Last edited:
OK,thank you.Your method worked nicely...
First I was sceptical about the grad V in your RHS...However,I started from the very beginning by dotting c with the required integral and it worked well.
 
There is an easier way I overlooked. Just take
{\vec k}\cdot\oint{\vec r}\times{\vec dr}
where k is a constant vector, and apply Stokes' theorem.
 
Last edited:
I did just that...your dr reolaced by dl...
 
Thread 'Help with Time-Independent Perturbation Theory "Good" States Proof'
(Disclaimer: this is not a HW question. I am self-studying, and this felt like the type of question I've seen in this forum. If there is somewhere better for me to share this doubt, please let me know and I'll transfer it right away.) I am currently reviewing Chapter 7 of Introduction to QM by Griffiths. I have been stuck for an hour or so trying to understand the last paragraph of this proof (pls check the attached file). It claims that we can express Ψ_{γ}(0) as a linear combination of...
Back
Top