I still can't quite see what I'm doing using surface integrals. I'd like an intuitive definition, something like Reinmann sums are to integrals. Believe me, I've seen enough theory with them and I'd rather have a feel for them before I go over the proofs.(adsbygoogle = window.adsbygoogle || []).push({});

Here is what Ithink:

You enclose a surface around a vector function. This surface is divided into tiny little squares. At the tangent point of each little square, you erect a normal vector. You then dot this normal vector with the vector that the vector function returns at that same point. You take the sum of these and get some scalar that tells you who knows what... the "strength or perpendicularness (bear with) with the given surface"?

Am I even remotely close?

I would request that no one make refrence to flux or line integrals, as my book already does that (miserbly I might add).

Thank you.

**Physics Forums - The Fusion of Science and Community**

The friendliest, high quality science and math community on the planet! Everyone who loves science is here!

# What the hell are surface integrals?

Loading...

Similar Threads - hell surface integrals | Date |
---|---|

I Surface Area of Volume of Revolution | Oct 10, 2017 |

What the hell is wrong with this? | Feb 16, 2010 |

Integrals from Hell | Dec 30, 2009 |

Integral from Hell? | Oct 29, 2008 |

Cycloid power series. problem from hell. | Dec 9, 2007 |

**Physics Forums - The Fusion of Science and Community**