What is the Error in Calculating the Integral of Dot Product?

Click For Summary

Discussion Overview

The discussion revolves around the calculation of an integral involving the dot product of two unit vectors in three-dimensional space. Participants explore the mathematical formulation of the integral over the unit sphere, denoted as S², and the implications of different parametrizations and coordinate systems on the outcome of the integral.

Discussion Character

  • Mathematical reasoning
  • Technical explanation
  • Exploratory

Main Points Raised

  • One participant presents a problem involving the integral of the absolute value of the dot product of a random unit vector and a fixed unit vector, questioning the correctness of their calculations.
  • Another participant clarifies that S² refers to the unit sphere, indicating that the initial parametrization used by the first participant is not uniform and may lead to biased results.
  • A later reply suggests that the integral can be more easily solved using spherical coordinates and notes the importance of the Jacobian determinant in the transformation.
  • There is a discussion about the necessity of including the Jacobian determinant when converting to spherical coordinates, with one participant confirming its relevance.

Areas of Agreement / Disagreement

Participants do not reach a consensus on the initial approach to the integral, with some agreeing on the need for a uniform parametrization and the use of spherical coordinates, while the exact method of integration remains a point of exploration.

Contextual Notes

The discussion highlights potential limitations in the initial parametrization and the need for careful consideration of coordinate transformations, particularly regarding the Jacobian determinant, which remains unresolved in terms of its application in this context.

gespex
Messages
56
Reaction score
0
Hi all,

I'm working on a math problem with a known answer - though I can't reproduce the maths.

The problem is this: there is a random 3d vector of unit length with a uniform probability, \vec{v}, and a secondary unit vector \vec{u}. It is stated that:
f = \int_{S^2}{| \vec{v} \cdot \vec{u} | d\vec{v}} = 2\pi

Now, I've never worked with integrals of this kind, and I'm not even exactly sure what S^2 means in the integral subscript, but given the problem I attempted to take a vector for \vec{u} = [0, 0, 1] (which shouldn't matter, as the distribution is uniform), and I set
\vec{v} = [cos(\alpha)sin(\sigma), sin(\alpha)sin(\sigma), cos(\sigma)]
for 0 \leq \alpha \leq 2\pi and 0 \leq \sigma \leq \pi.

Now I expected that:
f = \int_{S^2}{| \vec{v} \cdot \vec{u} |d\vec{v}} = \int_{\alpha = 0}^{2\pi}\int_{\sigma = 0}^{\pi} | \vec{v} \cdot \vec{u} |d{\sigma}d\alpha
f = \int_{\alpha = 0}^{2\pi}\int_{\sigma = 0}^{\pi} | cos(\sigma) |d{\sigma}d\alpha = \int_{\alpha = 0}^{2\pi}\int_{\sigma = 0}^{{1 \over 2} \pi} 2cos(\sigma)d{\sigma}d\alpha
f = \int_{\alpha = 0}^{2\pi} 2[sin({1 \over 2}\pi) - sin(0)]d\alpha = 4\pi

Which is not what the apparent solution should be. What is the error in my logic? And how can it be proven that f = 2\pi?

Thanks in advance
 
Physics news on Phys.org
S_2 is the unit sphere - the set of all points with distance 1 to the origin.

Your parametrization of the sphere is not uniform, you favor points close to u (and on the opposite side) in the integral.
This is easier to solve in spherical coordinates.
 
Thanks for your answer.

I did manage to reproduce the answer now. Though I didn't know integration in spherical coordinates. I actually did convert it to spherical coordinates (right?), with p = 1 (the distance from the origin), except I didn't take into account the "Jacobian determinant". I really only had to multiply it with p^2 sin(\sigma), is that correct?
 
I think so, yes.
 

Similar threads

  • · Replies 3 ·
Replies
3
Views
3K
  • · Replies 5 ·
Replies
5
Views
2K
  • · Replies 14 ·
Replies
14
Views
3K
  • · Replies 4 ·
Replies
4
Views
4K
  • · Replies 1 ·
Replies
1
Views
3K
  • · Replies 2 ·
Replies
2
Views
2K
  • · Replies 29 ·
Replies
29
Views
5K
  • · Replies 1 ·
Replies
1
Views
3K
  • · Replies 3 ·
Replies
3
Views
3K
  • · Replies 1 ·
Replies
1
Views
3K