What is the Difference Between ∫X.dY and ∫Y.dX in Physical Applications?

AI Thread Summary
The discussion clarifies the differences between the integrals ∫X.dY and ∫Y.dX in physical contexts, emphasizing that ∫X.dY relates to area bounded by the curve and the Y-axis, while ∫Y.dX relates to the area bounded by the curve and the X-axis. It highlights that in physical applications, such as calculating work, ∫F.dX represents force multiplied by displacement, whereas ∫X.dF does not yield the same physical interpretation. The conversation also touches on pressure-volume work, noting that ∫p.dv is meaningful as work done, while the significance of ∫v.dp remains unclear. The participants agree that without proper definitions of X and Y, the integrals lack physical meaning. Overall, the discussion underscores the importance of context and definitions in interpreting these mathematical expressions in physical applications.
transparent
Messages
19
Reaction score
0
What is the difference between ∫X.dY and ∫Y.dX in the physical world? I know what the difference is in pure mathematics. ∫X.dY represents the are bounded by the curve and the Y axis while ∫Y.dX represents the area bounded by the curve and the X axis. But I am unable to translate this into physical situations.

For example when we are doing ∫F.dX, we are calculating force multiplied by displacement for very small displacements and then adding them all up. Similarly ∫X.dF should mean that we are multiplying the displacement of the particle for a very small change in F with that small change. Should they not mean the same thing and give the same result? Yet only the first is called the work done. One other example that I can think of is that of pressure-volume work. ∫p.dv is the work done. I can't even think of what ∫v.dp means. What does it mean?
 
Physics news on Phys.org
X and Y are arbitrary variables. If you do not define them, the integrals are meaningless.

I can't even think of what ∫v.dp means
Integrate the volume for a pressure change. If volume is a function of pressure, this is possible (I am not sure if there is a useful physical interpretation for that).
 
transparent said:
For example when we are doing ∫F.dX, we are calculating force multiplied by displacement for very small displacements and then adding them all up.
Correct.

Similarly ∫X.dF should mean that we are multiplying the displacement of the particle for a very small change in F with that small change.
No. we are multiplying "the displacement of the particle", not "the displacement of the particle for a very small change in F". In other words, "the displacement from origin", not "the small change in displacement".

I can't even think of what ∫v.dp means. What does it mean?
If you write down a mathematical formula "at random", usually it doesn't mean anything physically.
 
AlephZero said:
Correct.


No. we are multiplying "the displacement of the particle", not "the displacement of the particle for a very small change in F". In other words, "the displacement from origin", not "the small change in displacement".

That makes sense. But ∫v.dp should mean something since dH=dU+pdV+Vdp. Here dU is the change in internal energy and pdV is the work done. What is Vdp?
 
So I know that electrons are fundamental, there's no 'material' that makes them up, it's like talking about a colour itself rather than a car or a flower. Now protons and neutrons and quarks and whatever other stuff is there fundamentally, I want someone to kind of teach me these, I have a lot of questions that books might not give the answer in the way I understand. Thanks

Similar threads

Back
Top