Why does dA become r dr dθ in polar coordinates?

4 replies · 4K views · last reply
chetzread
Messages
798
Reaction score
1

Homework Statement


can someone explain about the formula of the circled part?
Why dA will become r(dr)(dθ)?
Printed formula sheet titled Formula, giving the conversion from 2D Cartesian to polar coordinates: x = r cos θ, y = r sin θ where 0 ≤ θ ≤ 2π, x² + y² = r², and a double integral over R of f(x, y) dA equals a double integral over R of f(r, θ) r dr dθ.

Homework Equations

The Attempt at a Solution


A = pi(r^2)
dA will become 2(pi)(r)(dr) ?
why did 2(pi) didnt appear in the equation ?
 
chetzread said:

Homework Statement


can someone explain about the formula of the circled part?
Why dA will become r(dr)(dθ)?
Boxed formula table titled Conversion Formula from 2-dimensional Cartesian Coordinate to Polar Coordinate, listing x = r cos θ, y = r sin θ with 0 ≤ θ ≤ 2π, x² + y² = r², and the double integral over R of f(x, y) dA equals the double integral over R of f(r, θ) r dr dθ.

Homework Equations

The Attempt at a Solution


A = pi(r^2)
dA will become 2(pi)(r)(dr) ?
why did 2(pi) didnt appear in the equation ?
dA = r ⋅ dr ⋅ dθ as can be seen from the diagram below:


Diagram of a polar sector with radius r and angle Δθ from the origin, showing a shaded annular patch ΔA bounded by arcs of length rΔθ and a radial width Δr.

​

2π has nothing to do with converting dA into its polar equivalent.
 
  • Like
Likes   Reactions: chetzread
chetzread said:
A = pi(r^2)
dA will become 2(pi)(r)(dr)?
The dA you calculated here is the infinitesimal increase in the area of a circle if you increase the radius by dr. In other words, it's the area of a ring of radius r and width dr. It's not the same dA that appears in the integral.
 
  • Like
Likes   Reactions: chetzread
chetzread said:
why did 2(pi) didnt appear in the equation ?
Is it clear to you now that this hasn't happened because the integral reads$$
\displaystyle \iint\limits_R f(x,y)\; dA = \iint\limits_R f(r,\theta)\; r \;dr\;d\theta\quad ?$$Only if ##\ f(r,\theta) = f(r)\ ## i.e. f does not depend on ##\theta##, the integration over ##d\theta## can be carried out (yielding ##2\pi##) and the result is$$
\displaystyle \iint\limits_R f(x,y)\; dA = \int\limits_{r_0}^{r_1} f(r)\; r \;dr\;\int\limits_0^{2\pi} d\theta\quad = 2\pi \int\limits_{r_0}^{r_1} f(r)\; r \;dr\;$$
 
BvU said:
Is it clear to you now that this hasn't happened because the integral reads$$
\displaystyle \iint\limits_R f(x,y)\; dA = \iint\limits_R f(r,\theta)\; r \;dr\;d\theta\quad ?$$Only if ##\ f(r,\theta) = f(r)\ ## i.e. f does not depend on ##\theta##, the integration over ##d\theta## can be carried out (yielding ##2\pi##) and the result is$$
\displaystyle \iint\limits_R f(x,y)\; dA = \int\limits_{r_0}^{r_1} f(r)\; r \;dr\;\int\limits_0^{2\pi} d\theta\quad = 2\pi \int\limits_{r_0}^{r_1} f(r)\; r \;dr\;$$
yes, thanks