Vector calculus fundamental theorem corollaries

Click For Summary

Homework Help Overview

The discussion revolves around proving a specific integral relationship involving the divergence theorem and vector calculus, particularly focusing on the manipulation of vector and scalar quantities within integrals.

Discussion Character

  • Exploratory, Mathematical reasoning, Assumption checking

Approaches and Questions Raised

  • Participants explore the application of the divergence theorem and the product rule for divergences, questioning how to maintain the vector nature of expressions while manipulating constants. There is discussion on the implications of treating a constant vector as uniform over space and its effect on integrals.

Discussion Status

Some participants have provided insights into the treatment of constant vectors in integrals, suggesting that the dot product represents scalar multiplication. However, there remains some confusion regarding the nature of the resulting integrals and whether they maintain vector characteristics.

Contextual Notes

Participants are navigating the complexities of vector calculus, particularly in the context of homework constraints that may limit the depth of exploration into the proofs and assertions being discussed.

Adam Lewis
Messages
15
Reaction score
0

Homework Statement


Prove

[tex]\int_{V}\nabla\ T d\tau\ = \oint_{S}Td\vec{a}[/tex]


Homework Equations



Divergence theorem:
[tex]\int_{V}(\nabla\bullet\vec{A})d\tau\ = \oint_{S}\vec{A}\bullet\ d\vec{a}[/tex]


The Attempt at a Solution


By using the divergence theorem with the product rule for divergences and setting [tex]\vec{A}\ = T\vec{c}[/tex] where c is a constant vector, I've got it down to

[tex]\int_{V}\vec{c}\bullet\nabla\ Td \tau\ = \oint_{S}T\vec{c}\bullet\ d\vec{a}[/tex]

Which is exactly what we're looking for except for that annoying c. You can work out the dot products in the integrals and cancel off the components of c, but this kills the vector nature of the expression. We need the gradient *vector* and the surface element *vector* to be in there. How do I get rid of c without turning everything scalar? Alternatively, how do I restore the expressions to vector-hood after getting rid of c?
 
Physics news on Phys.org
Adam Lewis said:

The Attempt at a Solution


By using the divergence theorem with the product rule for divergences and setting [tex]\vec{A}\ = T\vec{c}[/tex] where c is a constant vector, I've got it down to

[tex]\int_{V}\vec{c}\bullet\nabla\ Td \tau\ = \oint_{S}T\vec{c}\bullet\ d\vec{a}[/tex]

Which is exactly what we're looking for except for that annoying c. You can work out the dot products in the integrals and cancel off the components of c, but this kills the vector nature of the expression. We need the gradient *vector* and the surface element *vector* to be in there. How do I get rid of c without turning everything scalar? Alternatively, how do I restore the expressions to vector-hood after getting rid of c?

First, since [itex]T[/itex] is a scalar function, [itex]T\vec{c} \cdot d\vec{a}=\vec{c} \cdot Td\vec{a}[/itex], from there, just use the fact that if [itex]\vec{c}[/itex] is a constant vector it is uniform over space, and hence it is treated as a constant for the spatial integrations:

[tex]\int_{V}\vec{c}\cdot\vec{v}d \tau=\vec{c}\cdot\int_{V}\vec{v}d \tau[/tex]

(for any vector [itex]\vec{v}[/itex] ) and

[tex]\oint_{S}\vec{c}\cdot\ Td\vec{a}=\vec{c}\cdot\oint_{S} Td\vec{a}[/tex]

If you haven't already proven these assertions in any of your calculus courses, it is a fairly straight forward process of writing the vectors in Cartesian coordinates (Since Cartesian unit vector are position independent, they can be pulled out of the integrals) and breaking up the integral into three pieces, and pulling out the constants [itex]c_x[/itex], [itex]c_y[/itex] and [itex]c_z[/itex].
 
Hi again,
Thanks a bundle. I guess the dot when c is pulled out represents scalar multiplication? The integral without c is of course a scalar, which was confusing me.
Thanks!
 
No, the 'dot' is still a vector dot product, the integral of a vector, is a vector.
 

Similar threads

  • · Replies 12 ·
Replies
12
Views
3K
Replies
8
Views
2K
Replies
1
Views
2K
  • · Replies 4 ·
Replies
4
Views
3K
  • · Replies 3 ·
Replies
3
Views
2K
  • · Replies 3 ·
Replies
3
Views
5K
  • · Replies 2 ·
Replies
2
Views
3K
Replies
1
Views
2K
  • · Replies 1 ·
Replies
1
Views
1K
  • · Replies 14 ·
Replies
14
Views
2K