Clarification on some surface integrals in an MSE answer Announcing the arrival of Valued Associate #679: Cesar Manara Planned maintenance scheduled April 17/18, 2019 at 00:00UTC (8:00pm US/Eastern)Showing volume and surface integration is unaffected by the singularity at $mathbfr'=mathbfr$Divergence of this field, spherical coordinatesTriple integral questionFind the divergence of the following vector fieldsEvaluating the surface integral side of a divergence theorem problemShow that $nablacdotleft(dfracmathbfe_rr^2right)=4pidelta(mathbfr)$ using the divergence theorem.Understanding a computation of a surface integral on a cubeSurface integral using Gauss theorem2D Divergence Theorem (example)Showing volume and surface integration is unaffected by the singularity at $mathbfr'=mathbfr$Proof: Distributing Divergence operator over cross product of two vectors
Super Attribute Position on Product Page Magento 1
Stars Make Stars
Output the ŋarâþ crîþ alphabet song without using (m)any letters
Is the argument below valid?
Should I discuss the type of campaign with my players?
What are the motives behind Cersei's orders given to Bronn?
Is there a documented rationale why the House Ways and Means chairman can demand tax info?
How can I fade player character when he goes inside or outside of the area?
Can inflation occur in a positive-sum game currency system such as the Stack Exchange reputation system?
3 doors, three guards, one stone
What is a Meta algorithm?
Bonus calculation: Am I making a mountain out of a molehill?
do i need a schengen visa for a direct flight to amsterdam?
How widely used is the term Treppenwitz? Is it something that most Germans know?
What happens to sewage if there is no river near by?
Diagram with tikz
Storing hydrofluoric acid before the invention of plastics
Proof involving the spectral radius and the Jordan canonical form
What are the pros and cons of Aerospike nosecones?
How to recreate this effect in Photoshop?
Check which numbers satisfy the condition [A*B*C = A! + B! + C!]
What does the "x" in "x86" represent?
Did Xerox really develop the first LAN?
Problem drawing boxes with arrows in tikZ
Clarification on some surface integrals in an MSE answer
Announcing the arrival of Valued Associate #679: Cesar Manara
Planned maintenance scheduled April 17/18, 2019 at 00:00UTC (8:00pm US/Eastern)Showing volume and surface integration is unaffected by the singularity at $mathbfr'=mathbfr$Divergence of this field, spherical coordinatesTriple integral questionFind the divergence of the following vector fieldsEvaluating the surface integral side of a divergence theorem problemShow that $nablacdotleft(dfracmathbfe_rr^2right)=4pidelta(mathbfr)$ using the divergence theorem.Understanding a computation of a surface integral on a cubeSurface integral using Gauss theorem2D Divergence Theorem (example)Showing volume and surface integration is unaffected by the singularity at $mathbfr'=mathbfr$Proof: Distributing Divergence operator over cross product of two vectors
$begingroup$
I am trying to understand this answer.
The answer is the following:
I'll assume that $V'$ is bounded and that $mathbfM'$ is continuously differentiable. To your primary question:
Is [the] divergence theorem applicable to 𝐿𝐻𝑆 of equation (4)?
The answer is, strictly speaking, no. The hypotheses of the divergence theorem include that the vector field in question is continuously differentiable, and $fracmathbfM'(r)r$ is not (in general).
However, one can still rigorously employ the divergence theorem to yield your expression by removing a ball $B_epsilon(P)$ from $V'$. Writing $B_epsilon '(P) equiv B_epsilon(P) cap V' $,
$$iiint_V' left[nabla' cdot left( fracmathbfM(r')r' right) right]dV' =
iiint_V' backslash B_epsilon'(P) left[nabla' cdot left( fracmathbfM(r')r' right) right]dV' + iiint_B_epsilon'(P) left[nabla' cdot left( fracmathbfM(r')r' right) right]dV' $$
The divergence Theorem may be applied to the first term for any $epsilon>0$, and one can show that the second term goes to $0$ in the limit $epsilon to 0$ via your chain of equalities in equation $(4)$, which hold $a.e.$ in $B_epsilon'(P)$, since $mathbfM'$, being continuous on the compact set $overlineV'$, is bounded, say by $M>0$.
With some computation, one can show that the integral over $partial(V' backslash B_epsilon '(P))$ arising from the first term approaches the integral over $S' = partial V'$ in the same limit, assuming $S'$ is smooth in a neighborhood of $P$. To be explicit,
$$ left( unicodex222F_partial V' - unicodex222F_partial(V' backslash B_epsilon '(P)) right)left[ fracmathbfM'(r') cdot hatmathbfnr' right]dS'
= left( iint_partial B_epsilon '(P) backslash partial B_epsilon(P) - iint_partial B_epsilon '(P) backslash partial V' right)left[ fracmathbfM'(r') cdot hatmathbfnr' right]dS' $$
That is, the integrals are the same up to the difference of the integrals over the piece of $partial B_epsilon '(P)$ from $partial V'$ and that from $partial B_epsilon(P)$. Since $S'$ is smooth near $P$, it is locally the graph of a smooth function $f(x,y)$ on the tangent plane at $P$ with standard linear coordinates $(x,y)$. So, for $epsilon$ sufficiently small, we may compute the first integral on the RHS above as an integral in the tangent plane, with area form $sqrt1 + f_x^2 + f_y^2dxdy=sqrt1 + f_x^2 + f_y^2sdsdtheta$ in polar coordinates $(s,theta)$. The term $sqrt1 + f_x^2 + f_y^2$ is continuous and therefore bounded, say by $C$ (independent of $epsilon$ for $epsilon$ sufficiently small), and further $r'(s,theta)=sqrts^2+f(s,theta)^2 geq s$. Hence
$$left|iint_partial B_epsilon '(P) backslash partial B_epsilon(P)left[ fracmathbfM'(r') cdot hatmathbfnr' right]dS'right| leq C int_0^epsilon int_0^2pi|mathbfM(s,theta)| fracssqrts^2+f^2dsdtheta leq 2pi MC epsilon$$
Note that the exact integration here may not range over all of $0 leq s leq epsilon$, but the bound still holds. Finally, in the second term on the RHS above, $r'=epsilon$, so that integral is bounded by $4pi Mepsilon$, and we have
$$left| left( unicodex222F_partial V' - unicodex222F_partial(V' backslash B_epsilon '(P)) right)left[ fracmathbfM'(r') cdot hatmathbfnr' right]dS' right| leq 2pi M(2+C)epsilon $$
which goes to $0$ as $epsilon to 0$. Since my first equation holds for all $epsilon >0$, we may take the limit of both sides as $epsilon to 0$ to obtain
$$iiint_V' left[nabla' cdot left( fracmathbfM(r')r' right) right]dV' = unicodex222F_partial V' left[ fracmathbfM'(r') cdot hatmathbfnr' right]dS'$$
As a naive application of the divergence theorem would have suggested.
Note that that "singularity" in the RHS integration does not cause the integral to diverge for essentially the same reason that it didn't in the volume integral: by passing to an appropriately defined set of coordinates in a neighborhood of $P$, we see that the area form gets small fast enough in this neighborhood for the integral to converge, just as the volume form did in your computations.
My misunderstandings are the following:
(1) What does $$ left( unicodex222F_partial V' - unicodex222F_partial(V' backslash B_epsilon '(P)) right)left[ fracmathbfM'(r') cdot hatmathbfnr' right]dS'
= left( iint_partial B_epsilon '(P) backslash partial B_epsilon(P) - iint_partial B_epsilon '(P) backslash partial V' right)left[ fracmathbfM'(r') cdot hatmathbfnr' right]dS' $$ mean? Why are they equal?
My interpretation:
$unicodex222F_partial V'$ means the integral over the whole of the surface of $V'$.
$text $
$unicodex222F_partial(V' backslash B_epsilon '(P))$ means the integral over the surface of "$B_epsilon '(P)$ removed from $V'$.
I have no idea about $displaystyleiint_partial B_epsilon '(P) backslash partial B_epsilon(P)$ and $displaystyleiint_partial B_epsilon '(P) backslash partial V'$ Please explain.
limits definite-integrals vector-analysis singularity
$endgroup$
add a comment |
$begingroup$
I am trying to understand this answer.
The answer is the following:
I'll assume that $V'$ is bounded and that $mathbfM'$ is continuously differentiable. To your primary question:
Is [the] divergence theorem applicable to 𝐿𝐻𝑆 of equation (4)?
The answer is, strictly speaking, no. The hypotheses of the divergence theorem include that the vector field in question is continuously differentiable, and $fracmathbfM'(r)r$ is not (in general).
However, one can still rigorously employ the divergence theorem to yield your expression by removing a ball $B_epsilon(P)$ from $V'$. Writing $B_epsilon '(P) equiv B_epsilon(P) cap V' $,
$$iiint_V' left[nabla' cdot left( fracmathbfM(r')r' right) right]dV' =
iiint_V' backslash B_epsilon'(P) left[nabla' cdot left( fracmathbfM(r')r' right) right]dV' + iiint_B_epsilon'(P) left[nabla' cdot left( fracmathbfM(r')r' right) right]dV' $$
The divergence Theorem may be applied to the first term for any $epsilon>0$, and one can show that the second term goes to $0$ in the limit $epsilon to 0$ via your chain of equalities in equation $(4)$, which hold $a.e.$ in $B_epsilon'(P)$, since $mathbfM'$, being continuous on the compact set $overlineV'$, is bounded, say by $M>0$.
With some computation, one can show that the integral over $partial(V' backslash B_epsilon '(P))$ arising from the first term approaches the integral over $S' = partial V'$ in the same limit, assuming $S'$ is smooth in a neighborhood of $P$. To be explicit,
$$ left( unicodex222F_partial V' - unicodex222F_partial(V' backslash B_epsilon '(P)) right)left[ fracmathbfM'(r') cdot hatmathbfnr' right]dS'
= left( iint_partial B_epsilon '(P) backslash partial B_epsilon(P) - iint_partial B_epsilon '(P) backslash partial V' right)left[ fracmathbfM'(r') cdot hatmathbfnr' right]dS' $$
That is, the integrals are the same up to the difference of the integrals over the piece of $partial B_epsilon '(P)$ from $partial V'$ and that from $partial B_epsilon(P)$. Since $S'$ is smooth near $P$, it is locally the graph of a smooth function $f(x,y)$ on the tangent plane at $P$ with standard linear coordinates $(x,y)$. So, for $epsilon$ sufficiently small, we may compute the first integral on the RHS above as an integral in the tangent plane, with area form $sqrt1 + f_x^2 + f_y^2dxdy=sqrt1 + f_x^2 + f_y^2sdsdtheta$ in polar coordinates $(s,theta)$. The term $sqrt1 + f_x^2 + f_y^2$ is continuous and therefore bounded, say by $C$ (independent of $epsilon$ for $epsilon$ sufficiently small), and further $r'(s,theta)=sqrts^2+f(s,theta)^2 geq s$. Hence
$$left|iint_partial B_epsilon '(P) backslash partial B_epsilon(P)left[ fracmathbfM'(r') cdot hatmathbfnr' right]dS'right| leq C int_0^epsilon int_0^2pi|mathbfM(s,theta)| fracssqrts^2+f^2dsdtheta leq 2pi MC epsilon$$
Note that the exact integration here may not range over all of $0 leq s leq epsilon$, but the bound still holds. Finally, in the second term on the RHS above, $r'=epsilon$, so that integral is bounded by $4pi Mepsilon$, and we have
$$left| left( unicodex222F_partial V' - unicodex222F_partial(V' backslash B_epsilon '(P)) right)left[ fracmathbfM'(r') cdot hatmathbfnr' right]dS' right| leq 2pi M(2+C)epsilon $$
which goes to $0$ as $epsilon to 0$. Since my first equation holds for all $epsilon >0$, we may take the limit of both sides as $epsilon to 0$ to obtain
$$iiint_V' left[nabla' cdot left( fracmathbfM(r')r' right) right]dV' = unicodex222F_partial V' left[ fracmathbfM'(r') cdot hatmathbfnr' right]dS'$$
As a naive application of the divergence theorem would have suggested.
Note that that "singularity" in the RHS integration does not cause the integral to diverge for essentially the same reason that it didn't in the volume integral: by passing to an appropriately defined set of coordinates in a neighborhood of $P$, we see that the area form gets small fast enough in this neighborhood for the integral to converge, just as the volume form did in your computations.
My misunderstandings are the following:
(1) What does $$ left( unicodex222F_partial V' - unicodex222F_partial(V' backslash B_epsilon '(P)) right)left[ fracmathbfM'(r') cdot hatmathbfnr' right]dS'
= left( iint_partial B_epsilon '(P) backslash partial B_epsilon(P) - iint_partial B_epsilon '(P) backslash partial V' right)left[ fracmathbfM'(r') cdot hatmathbfnr' right]dS' $$ mean? Why are they equal?
My interpretation:
$unicodex222F_partial V'$ means the integral over the whole of the surface of $V'$.
$text $
$unicodex222F_partial(V' backslash B_epsilon '(P))$ means the integral over the surface of "$B_epsilon '(P)$ removed from $V'$.
I have no idea about $displaystyleiint_partial B_epsilon '(P) backslash partial B_epsilon(P)$ and $displaystyleiint_partial B_epsilon '(P) backslash partial V'$ Please explain.
limits definite-integrals vector-analysis singularity
$endgroup$
$begingroup$
Think! Your question has nothing to do with elementary set theory.
$endgroup$
– William Elliot
Mar 26 at 11:57
add a comment |
$begingroup$
I am trying to understand this answer.
The answer is the following:
I'll assume that $V'$ is bounded and that $mathbfM'$ is continuously differentiable. To your primary question:
Is [the] divergence theorem applicable to 𝐿𝐻𝑆 of equation (4)?
The answer is, strictly speaking, no. The hypotheses of the divergence theorem include that the vector field in question is continuously differentiable, and $fracmathbfM'(r)r$ is not (in general).
However, one can still rigorously employ the divergence theorem to yield your expression by removing a ball $B_epsilon(P)$ from $V'$. Writing $B_epsilon '(P) equiv B_epsilon(P) cap V' $,
$$iiint_V' left[nabla' cdot left( fracmathbfM(r')r' right) right]dV' =
iiint_V' backslash B_epsilon'(P) left[nabla' cdot left( fracmathbfM(r')r' right) right]dV' + iiint_B_epsilon'(P) left[nabla' cdot left( fracmathbfM(r')r' right) right]dV' $$
The divergence Theorem may be applied to the first term for any $epsilon>0$, and one can show that the second term goes to $0$ in the limit $epsilon to 0$ via your chain of equalities in equation $(4)$, which hold $a.e.$ in $B_epsilon'(P)$, since $mathbfM'$, being continuous on the compact set $overlineV'$, is bounded, say by $M>0$.
With some computation, one can show that the integral over $partial(V' backslash B_epsilon '(P))$ arising from the first term approaches the integral over $S' = partial V'$ in the same limit, assuming $S'$ is smooth in a neighborhood of $P$. To be explicit,
$$ left( unicodex222F_partial V' - unicodex222F_partial(V' backslash B_epsilon '(P)) right)left[ fracmathbfM'(r') cdot hatmathbfnr' right]dS'
= left( iint_partial B_epsilon '(P) backslash partial B_epsilon(P) - iint_partial B_epsilon '(P) backslash partial V' right)left[ fracmathbfM'(r') cdot hatmathbfnr' right]dS' $$
That is, the integrals are the same up to the difference of the integrals over the piece of $partial B_epsilon '(P)$ from $partial V'$ and that from $partial B_epsilon(P)$. Since $S'$ is smooth near $P$, it is locally the graph of a smooth function $f(x,y)$ on the tangent plane at $P$ with standard linear coordinates $(x,y)$. So, for $epsilon$ sufficiently small, we may compute the first integral on the RHS above as an integral in the tangent plane, with area form $sqrt1 + f_x^2 + f_y^2dxdy=sqrt1 + f_x^2 + f_y^2sdsdtheta$ in polar coordinates $(s,theta)$. The term $sqrt1 + f_x^2 + f_y^2$ is continuous and therefore bounded, say by $C$ (independent of $epsilon$ for $epsilon$ sufficiently small), and further $r'(s,theta)=sqrts^2+f(s,theta)^2 geq s$. Hence
$$left|iint_partial B_epsilon '(P) backslash partial B_epsilon(P)left[ fracmathbfM'(r') cdot hatmathbfnr' right]dS'right| leq C int_0^epsilon int_0^2pi|mathbfM(s,theta)| fracssqrts^2+f^2dsdtheta leq 2pi MC epsilon$$
Note that the exact integration here may not range over all of $0 leq s leq epsilon$, but the bound still holds. Finally, in the second term on the RHS above, $r'=epsilon$, so that integral is bounded by $4pi Mepsilon$, and we have
$$left| left( unicodex222F_partial V' - unicodex222F_partial(V' backslash B_epsilon '(P)) right)left[ fracmathbfM'(r') cdot hatmathbfnr' right]dS' right| leq 2pi M(2+C)epsilon $$
which goes to $0$ as $epsilon to 0$. Since my first equation holds for all $epsilon >0$, we may take the limit of both sides as $epsilon to 0$ to obtain
$$iiint_V' left[nabla' cdot left( fracmathbfM(r')r' right) right]dV' = unicodex222F_partial V' left[ fracmathbfM'(r') cdot hatmathbfnr' right]dS'$$
As a naive application of the divergence theorem would have suggested.
Note that that "singularity" in the RHS integration does not cause the integral to diverge for essentially the same reason that it didn't in the volume integral: by passing to an appropriately defined set of coordinates in a neighborhood of $P$, we see that the area form gets small fast enough in this neighborhood for the integral to converge, just as the volume form did in your computations.
My misunderstandings are the following:
(1) What does $$ left( unicodex222F_partial V' - unicodex222F_partial(V' backslash B_epsilon '(P)) right)left[ fracmathbfM'(r') cdot hatmathbfnr' right]dS'
= left( iint_partial B_epsilon '(P) backslash partial B_epsilon(P) - iint_partial B_epsilon '(P) backslash partial V' right)left[ fracmathbfM'(r') cdot hatmathbfnr' right]dS' $$ mean? Why are they equal?
My interpretation:
$unicodex222F_partial V'$ means the integral over the whole of the surface of $V'$.
$text $
$unicodex222F_partial(V' backslash B_epsilon '(P))$ means the integral over the surface of "$B_epsilon '(P)$ removed from $V'$.
I have no idea about $displaystyleiint_partial B_epsilon '(P) backslash partial B_epsilon(P)$ and $displaystyleiint_partial B_epsilon '(P) backslash partial V'$ Please explain.
limits definite-integrals vector-analysis singularity
$endgroup$
I am trying to understand this answer.
The answer is the following:
I'll assume that $V'$ is bounded and that $mathbfM'$ is continuously differentiable. To your primary question:
Is [the] divergence theorem applicable to 𝐿𝐻𝑆 of equation (4)?
The answer is, strictly speaking, no. The hypotheses of the divergence theorem include that the vector field in question is continuously differentiable, and $fracmathbfM'(r)r$ is not (in general).
However, one can still rigorously employ the divergence theorem to yield your expression by removing a ball $B_epsilon(P)$ from $V'$. Writing $B_epsilon '(P) equiv B_epsilon(P) cap V' $,
$$iiint_V' left[nabla' cdot left( fracmathbfM(r')r' right) right]dV' =
iiint_V' backslash B_epsilon'(P) left[nabla' cdot left( fracmathbfM(r')r' right) right]dV' + iiint_B_epsilon'(P) left[nabla' cdot left( fracmathbfM(r')r' right) right]dV' $$
The divergence Theorem may be applied to the first term for any $epsilon>0$, and one can show that the second term goes to $0$ in the limit $epsilon to 0$ via your chain of equalities in equation $(4)$, which hold $a.e.$ in $B_epsilon'(P)$, since $mathbfM'$, being continuous on the compact set $overlineV'$, is bounded, say by $M>0$.
With some computation, one can show that the integral over $partial(V' backslash B_epsilon '(P))$ arising from the first term approaches the integral over $S' = partial V'$ in the same limit, assuming $S'$ is smooth in a neighborhood of $P$. To be explicit,
$$ left( unicodex222F_partial V' - unicodex222F_partial(V' backslash B_epsilon '(P)) right)left[ fracmathbfM'(r') cdot hatmathbfnr' right]dS'
= left( iint_partial B_epsilon '(P) backslash partial B_epsilon(P) - iint_partial B_epsilon '(P) backslash partial V' right)left[ fracmathbfM'(r') cdot hatmathbfnr' right]dS' $$
That is, the integrals are the same up to the difference of the integrals over the piece of $partial B_epsilon '(P)$ from $partial V'$ and that from $partial B_epsilon(P)$. Since $S'$ is smooth near $P$, it is locally the graph of a smooth function $f(x,y)$ on the tangent plane at $P$ with standard linear coordinates $(x,y)$. So, for $epsilon$ sufficiently small, we may compute the first integral on the RHS above as an integral in the tangent plane, with area form $sqrt1 + f_x^2 + f_y^2dxdy=sqrt1 + f_x^2 + f_y^2sdsdtheta$ in polar coordinates $(s,theta)$. The term $sqrt1 + f_x^2 + f_y^2$ is continuous and therefore bounded, say by $C$ (independent of $epsilon$ for $epsilon$ sufficiently small), and further $r'(s,theta)=sqrts^2+f(s,theta)^2 geq s$. Hence
$$left|iint_partial B_epsilon '(P) backslash partial B_epsilon(P)left[ fracmathbfM'(r') cdot hatmathbfnr' right]dS'right| leq C int_0^epsilon int_0^2pi|mathbfM(s,theta)| fracssqrts^2+f^2dsdtheta leq 2pi MC epsilon$$
Note that the exact integration here may not range over all of $0 leq s leq epsilon$, but the bound still holds. Finally, in the second term on the RHS above, $r'=epsilon$, so that integral is bounded by $4pi Mepsilon$, and we have
$$left| left( unicodex222F_partial V' - unicodex222F_partial(V' backslash B_epsilon '(P)) right)left[ fracmathbfM'(r') cdot hatmathbfnr' right]dS' right| leq 2pi M(2+C)epsilon $$
which goes to $0$ as $epsilon to 0$. Since my first equation holds for all $epsilon >0$, we may take the limit of both sides as $epsilon to 0$ to obtain
$$iiint_V' left[nabla' cdot left( fracmathbfM(r')r' right) right]dV' = unicodex222F_partial V' left[ fracmathbfM'(r') cdot hatmathbfnr' right]dS'$$
As a naive application of the divergence theorem would have suggested.
Note that that "singularity" in the RHS integration does not cause the integral to diverge for essentially the same reason that it didn't in the volume integral: by passing to an appropriately defined set of coordinates in a neighborhood of $P$, we see that the area form gets small fast enough in this neighborhood for the integral to converge, just as the volume form did in your computations.
My misunderstandings are the following:
(1) What does $$ left( unicodex222F_partial V' - unicodex222F_partial(V' backslash B_epsilon '(P)) right)left[ fracmathbfM'(r') cdot hatmathbfnr' right]dS'
= left( iint_partial B_epsilon '(P) backslash partial B_epsilon(P) - iint_partial B_epsilon '(P) backslash partial V' right)left[ fracmathbfM'(r') cdot hatmathbfnr' right]dS' $$ mean? Why are they equal?
My interpretation:
$unicodex222F_partial V'$ means the integral over the whole of the surface of $V'$.
$text $
$unicodex222F_partial(V' backslash B_epsilon '(P))$ means the integral over the surface of "$B_epsilon '(P)$ removed from $V'$.
I have no idea about $displaystyleiint_partial B_epsilon '(P) backslash partial B_epsilon(P)$ and $displaystyleiint_partial B_epsilon '(P) backslash partial V'$ Please explain.
limits definite-integrals vector-analysis singularity
limits definite-integrals vector-analysis singularity
edited Mar 26 at 11:55
William Elliot
9,1962820
9,1962820
asked Mar 26 at 10:32
OliverOliver
225
225
$begingroup$
Think! Your question has nothing to do with elementary set theory.
$endgroup$
– William Elliot
Mar 26 at 11:57
add a comment |
$begingroup$
Think! Your question has nothing to do with elementary set theory.
$endgroup$
– William Elliot
Mar 26 at 11:57
$begingroup$
Think! Your question has nothing to do with elementary set theory.
$endgroup$
– William Elliot
Mar 26 at 11:57
$begingroup$
Think! Your question has nothing to do with elementary set theory.
$endgroup$
– William Elliot
Mar 26 at 11:57
add a comment |
1 Answer
1
active
oldest
votes
$begingroup$
Original answerer here. You are correct regarding what the two integrations mean individually. The notation on the LHS of the equation under consideration simply means the difference of the surface integrals over the two domains you've identified (of the same integrand $fracmathbfM'(mathbfr') cdot mathbfhatnr'$). Clearly the result will be an integral of this same integrand; the question is the domain.
The integrations over the intersection of the two original domains cancel, so our resulting integration won't contain any of the boundary of your rectangular prism except the bit above the removed ball, and the only other surface we need to include is the portion of the boundary of $B_epsilon '(P)$ inside the rectangular prism. Note that $B_epsilon'(P)$ in your drawn scenario is a half-ball, the boundary of which is a hemisphere (part of $partial B_epsilon(P)$, which is the full sphere of radius $epsilon$ centered at $P$) plus a circular disc (part of $partial V'$), and these two pieces are exactly what we've identified as what we want to integrate over. Note each of these pieces came from a different term on our LHS, so they'll be integrated over on the RHS with different signs. In particular, the disc should be integrated over with a positive sign, while the hemisphere should be integrated over with a negative sign. That is, our integral should be
$$ left( iint_textdisc - iint_texthemisphere right)left[ fracmathbfM'(r') cdot hatmathbfnr' right]dS'$$
All that remains is to check that my original notation agrees with this. But $partial B_epsilon '(P) backslash partial B_epsilon(P)$ just means "the hemisphere and disc, remove anything contained in the full sphere", which is just the disc, while $partial B_epsilon '(P) backslash partial V'$ just means "the hemisphere and disc, remove anything contained in the rectangular prism's boundary", which is just the hemisphere, so the above integral is the same as
$$ left( iint_partial B_epsilon '(P) backslash partial B_epsilon(P) - iint_partial B_epsilon '(P) backslash partial V' right)left[ fracmathbfM'(r') cdot hatmathbfnr' right]dS'$$
As our equation claims. The advantage of using this notation is that it represents the correct domain no matter what the shape of $V'$ is, and it emphasizes that the difference only depends on a region within distance $epsilon$ of $P$.
$endgroup$
$begingroup$
How shall we show that the domain on the LHS and RHS of the equation below are same: $$ left( unicodex222F_partial V' - unicodex222F_partial(V' backslash B_epsilon '(P)) right) = left( iint_partial B_epsilon '(P) backslash partial B_epsilon(P) - iint_partial B_epsilon '(P) backslash partial V' right)$$
$endgroup$
– Joe
Mar 26 at 19:29
$begingroup$
@Joe The $LHS$ says "integrate over all of $partial V'$, then integrate over $partial (V' backslash B_epsilon '(P))$, and subtract". Since we are subtracting, the integrals over the intersection of these two sets cancel, so the remainder is the integral over the piece of $partial V'$ not in $partial (V' backslash B_epsilon '(P))$, minus the integral over the piece of $partial (V' backslash B_epsilon '(P))$ not in $partial V'$. The first of these domains is the circle referenced above, and the second of these domains is the hemisphere referenced above.
$endgroup$
– jawheele
Mar 26 at 19:38
add a comment |
Your Answer
StackExchange.ready(function()
var channelOptions =
tags: "".split(" "),
id: "69"
;
initTagRenderer("".split(" "), "".split(" "), channelOptions);
StackExchange.using("externalEditor", function()
// Have to fire editor after snippets, if snippets enabled
if (StackExchange.settings.snippets.snippetsEnabled)
StackExchange.using("snippets", function()
createEditor();
);
else
createEditor();
);
function createEditor()
StackExchange.prepareEditor(
heartbeatType: 'answer',
autoActivateHeartbeat: false,
convertImagesToLinks: true,
noModals: true,
showLowRepImageUploadWarning: true,
reputationToPostImages: 10,
bindNavPrevention: true,
postfix: "",
imageUploader:
brandingHtml: "Powered by u003ca class="icon-imgur-white" href="https://imgur.com/"u003eu003c/au003e",
contentPolicyHtml: "User contributions licensed under u003ca href="https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-sa/3.0/"u003ecc by-sa 3.0 with attribution requiredu003c/au003e u003ca href="https://stackoverflow.com/legal/content-policy"u003e(content policy)u003c/au003e",
allowUrls: true
,
noCode: true, onDemand: true,
discardSelector: ".discard-answer"
,immediatelyShowMarkdownHelp:true
);
);
Sign up or log in
StackExchange.ready(function ()
StackExchange.helpers.onClickDraftSave('#login-link');
);
Sign up using Google
Sign up using Facebook
Sign up using Email and Password
Post as a guest
Required, but never shown
StackExchange.ready(
function ()
StackExchange.openid.initPostLogin('.new-post-login', 'https%3a%2f%2fmath.stackexchange.com%2fquestions%2f3163006%2fclarification-on-some-surface-integrals-in-an-mse-answer%23new-answer', 'question_page');
);
Post as a guest
Required, but never shown
1 Answer
1
active
oldest
votes
1 Answer
1
active
oldest
votes
active
oldest
votes
active
oldest
votes
$begingroup$
Original answerer here. You are correct regarding what the two integrations mean individually. The notation on the LHS of the equation under consideration simply means the difference of the surface integrals over the two domains you've identified (of the same integrand $fracmathbfM'(mathbfr') cdot mathbfhatnr'$). Clearly the result will be an integral of this same integrand; the question is the domain.
The integrations over the intersection of the two original domains cancel, so our resulting integration won't contain any of the boundary of your rectangular prism except the bit above the removed ball, and the only other surface we need to include is the portion of the boundary of $B_epsilon '(P)$ inside the rectangular prism. Note that $B_epsilon'(P)$ in your drawn scenario is a half-ball, the boundary of which is a hemisphere (part of $partial B_epsilon(P)$, which is the full sphere of radius $epsilon$ centered at $P$) plus a circular disc (part of $partial V'$), and these two pieces are exactly what we've identified as what we want to integrate over. Note each of these pieces came from a different term on our LHS, so they'll be integrated over on the RHS with different signs. In particular, the disc should be integrated over with a positive sign, while the hemisphere should be integrated over with a negative sign. That is, our integral should be
$$ left( iint_textdisc - iint_texthemisphere right)left[ fracmathbfM'(r') cdot hatmathbfnr' right]dS'$$
All that remains is to check that my original notation agrees with this. But $partial B_epsilon '(P) backslash partial B_epsilon(P)$ just means "the hemisphere and disc, remove anything contained in the full sphere", which is just the disc, while $partial B_epsilon '(P) backslash partial V'$ just means "the hemisphere and disc, remove anything contained in the rectangular prism's boundary", which is just the hemisphere, so the above integral is the same as
$$ left( iint_partial B_epsilon '(P) backslash partial B_epsilon(P) - iint_partial B_epsilon '(P) backslash partial V' right)left[ fracmathbfM'(r') cdot hatmathbfnr' right]dS'$$
As our equation claims. The advantage of using this notation is that it represents the correct domain no matter what the shape of $V'$ is, and it emphasizes that the difference only depends on a region within distance $epsilon$ of $P$.
$endgroup$
$begingroup$
How shall we show that the domain on the LHS and RHS of the equation below are same: $$ left( unicodex222F_partial V' - unicodex222F_partial(V' backslash B_epsilon '(P)) right) = left( iint_partial B_epsilon '(P) backslash partial B_epsilon(P) - iint_partial B_epsilon '(P) backslash partial V' right)$$
$endgroup$
– Joe
Mar 26 at 19:29
$begingroup$
@Joe The $LHS$ says "integrate over all of $partial V'$, then integrate over $partial (V' backslash B_epsilon '(P))$, and subtract". Since we are subtracting, the integrals over the intersection of these two sets cancel, so the remainder is the integral over the piece of $partial V'$ not in $partial (V' backslash B_epsilon '(P))$, minus the integral over the piece of $partial (V' backslash B_epsilon '(P))$ not in $partial V'$. The first of these domains is the circle referenced above, and the second of these domains is the hemisphere referenced above.
$endgroup$
– jawheele
Mar 26 at 19:38
add a comment |
$begingroup$
Original answerer here. You are correct regarding what the two integrations mean individually. The notation on the LHS of the equation under consideration simply means the difference of the surface integrals over the two domains you've identified (of the same integrand $fracmathbfM'(mathbfr') cdot mathbfhatnr'$). Clearly the result will be an integral of this same integrand; the question is the domain.
The integrations over the intersection of the two original domains cancel, so our resulting integration won't contain any of the boundary of your rectangular prism except the bit above the removed ball, and the only other surface we need to include is the portion of the boundary of $B_epsilon '(P)$ inside the rectangular prism. Note that $B_epsilon'(P)$ in your drawn scenario is a half-ball, the boundary of which is a hemisphere (part of $partial B_epsilon(P)$, which is the full sphere of radius $epsilon$ centered at $P$) plus a circular disc (part of $partial V'$), and these two pieces are exactly what we've identified as what we want to integrate over. Note each of these pieces came from a different term on our LHS, so they'll be integrated over on the RHS with different signs. In particular, the disc should be integrated over with a positive sign, while the hemisphere should be integrated over with a negative sign. That is, our integral should be
$$ left( iint_textdisc - iint_texthemisphere right)left[ fracmathbfM'(r') cdot hatmathbfnr' right]dS'$$
All that remains is to check that my original notation agrees with this. But $partial B_epsilon '(P) backslash partial B_epsilon(P)$ just means "the hemisphere and disc, remove anything contained in the full sphere", which is just the disc, while $partial B_epsilon '(P) backslash partial V'$ just means "the hemisphere and disc, remove anything contained in the rectangular prism's boundary", which is just the hemisphere, so the above integral is the same as
$$ left( iint_partial B_epsilon '(P) backslash partial B_epsilon(P) - iint_partial B_epsilon '(P) backslash partial V' right)left[ fracmathbfM'(r') cdot hatmathbfnr' right]dS'$$
As our equation claims. The advantage of using this notation is that it represents the correct domain no matter what the shape of $V'$ is, and it emphasizes that the difference only depends on a region within distance $epsilon$ of $P$.
$endgroup$
$begingroup$
How shall we show that the domain on the LHS and RHS of the equation below are same: $$ left( unicodex222F_partial V' - unicodex222F_partial(V' backslash B_epsilon '(P)) right) = left( iint_partial B_epsilon '(P) backslash partial B_epsilon(P) - iint_partial B_epsilon '(P) backslash partial V' right)$$
$endgroup$
– Joe
Mar 26 at 19:29
$begingroup$
@Joe The $LHS$ says "integrate over all of $partial V'$, then integrate over $partial (V' backslash B_epsilon '(P))$, and subtract". Since we are subtracting, the integrals over the intersection of these two sets cancel, so the remainder is the integral over the piece of $partial V'$ not in $partial (V' backslash B_epsilon '(P))$, minus the integral over the piece of $partial (V' backslash B_epsilon '(P))$ not in $partial V'$. The first of these domains is the circle referenced above, and the second of these domains is the hemisphere referenced above.
$endgroup$
– jawheele
Mar 26 at 19:38
add a comment |
$begingroup$
Original answerer here. You are correct regarding what the two integrations mean individually. The notation on the LHS of the equation under consideration simply means the difference of the surface integrals over the two domains you've identified (of the same integrand $fracmathbfM'(mathbfr') cdot mathbfhatnr'$). Clearly the result will be an integral of this same integrand; the question is the domain.
The integrations over the intersection of the two original domains cancel, so our resulting integration won't contain any of the boundary of your rectangular prism except the bit above the removed ball, and the only other surface we need to include is the portion of the boundary of $B_epsilon '(P)$ inside the rectangular prism. Note that $B_epsilon'(P)$ in your drawn scenario is a half-ball, the boundary of which is a hemisphere (part of $partial B_epsilon(P)$, which is the full sphere of radius $epsilon$ centered at $P$) plus a circular disc (part of $partial V'$), and these two pieces are exactly what we've identified as what we want to integrate over. Note each of these pieces came from a different term on our LHS, so they'll be integrated over on the RHS with different signs. In particular, the disc should be integrated over with a positive sign, while the hemisphere should be integrated over with a negative sign. That is, our integral should be
$$ left( iint_textdisc - iint_texthemisphere right)left[ fracmathbfM'(r') cdot hatmathbfnr' right]dS'$$
All that remains is to check that my original notation agrees with this. But $partial B_epsilon '(P) backslash partial B_epsilon(P)$ just means "the hemisphere and disc, remove anything contained in the full sphere", which is just the disc, while $partial B_epsilon '(P) backslash partial V'$ just means "the hemisphere and disc, remove anything contained in the rectangular prism's boundary", which is just the hemisphere, so the above integral is the same as
$$ left( iint_partial B_epsilon '(P) backslash partial B_epsilon(P) - iint_partial B_epsilon '(P) backslash partial V' right)left[ fracmathbfM'(r') cdot hatmathbfnr' right]dS'$$
As our equation claims. The advantage of using this notation is that it represents the correct domain no matter what the shape of $V'$ is, and it emphasizes that the difference only depends on a region within distance $epsilon$ of $P$.
$endgroup$
Original answerer here. You are correct regarding what the two integrations mean individually. The notation on the LHS of the equation under consideration simply means the difference of the surface integrals over the two domains you've identified (of the same integrand $fracmathbfM'(mathbfr') cdot mathbfhatnr'$). Clearly the result will be an integral of this same integrand; the question is the domain.
The integrations over the intersection of the two original domains cancel, so our resulting integration won't contain any of the boundary of your rectangular prism except the bit above the removed ball, and the only other surface we need to include is the portion of the boundary of $B_epsilon '(P)$ inside the rectangular prism. Note that $B_epsilon'(P)$ in your drawn scenario is a half-ball, the boundary of which is a hemisphere (part of $partial B_epsilon(P)$, which is the full sphere of radius $epsilon$ centered at $P$) plus a circular disc (part of $partial V'$), and these two pieces are exactly what we've identified as what we want to integrate over. Note each of these pieces came from a different term on our LHS, so they'll be integrated over on the RHS with different signs. In particular, the disc should be integrated over with a positive sign, while the hemisphere should be integrated over with a negative sign. That is, our integral should be
$$ left( iint_textdisc - iint_texthemisphere right)left[ fracmathbfM'(r') cdot hatmathbfnr' right]dS'$$
All that remains is to check that my original notation agrees with this. But $partial B_epsilon '(P) backslash partial B_epsilon(P)$ just means "the hemisphere and disc, remove anything contained in the full sphere", which is just the disc, while $partial B_epsilon '(P) backslash partial V'$ just means "the hemisphere and disc, remove anything contained in the rectangular prism's boundary", which is just the hemisphere, so the above integral is the same as
$$ left( iint_partial B_epsilon '(P) backslash partial B_epsilon(P) - iint_partial B_epsilon '(P) backslash partial V' right)left[ fracmathbfM'(r') cdot hatmathbfnr' right]dS'$$
As our equation claims. The advantage of using this notation is that it represents the correct domain no matter what the shape of $V'$ is, and it emphasizes that the difference only depends on a region within distance $epsilon$ of $P$.
edited Mar 26 at 20:20
answered Mar 26 at 14:04
jawheelejawheele
51639
51639
$begingroup$
How shall we show that the domain on the LHS and RHS of the equation below are same: $$ left( unicodex222F_partial V' - unicodex222F_partial(V' backslash B_epsilon '(P)) right) = left( iint_partial B_epsilon '(P) backslash partial B_epsilon(P) - iint_partial B_epsilon '(P) backslash partial V' right)$$
$endgroup$
– Joe
Mar 26 at 19:29
$begingroup$
@Joe The $LHS$ says "integrate over all of $partial V'$, then integrate over $partial (V' backslash B_epsilon '(P))$, and subtract". Since we are subtracting, the integrals over the intersection of these two sets cancel, so the remainder is the integral over the piece of $partial V'$ not in $partial (V' backslash B_epsilon '(P))$, minus the integral over the piece of $partial (V' backslash B_epsilon '(P))$ not in $partial V'$. The first of these domains is the circle referenced above, and the second of these domains is the hemisphere referenced above.
$endgroup$
– jawheele
Mar 26 at 19:38
add a comment |
$begingroup$
How shall we show that the domain on the LHS and RHS of the equation below are same: $$ left( unicodex222F_partial V' - unicodex222F_partial(V' backslash B_epsilon '(P)) right) = left( iint_partial B_epsilon '(P) backslash partial B_epsilon(P) - iint_partial B_epsilon '(P) backslash partial V' right)$$
$endgroup$
– Joe
Mar 26 at 19:29
$begingroup$
@Joe The $LHS$ says "integrate over all of $partial V'$, then integrate over $partial (V' backslash B_epsilon '(P))$, and subtract". Since we are subtracting, the integrals over the intersection of these two sets cancel, so the remainder is the integral over the piece of $partial V'$ not in $partial (V' backslash B_epsilon '(P))$, minus the integral over the piece of $partial (V' backslash B_epsilon '(P))$ not in $partial V'$. The first of these domains is the circle referenced above, and the second of these domains is the hemisphere referenced above.
$endgroup$
– jawheele
Mar 26 at 19:38
$begingroup$
How shall we show that the domain on the LHS and RHS of the equation below are same: $$ left( unicodex222F_partial V' - unicodex222F_partial(V' backslash B_epsilon '(P)) right) = left( iint_partial B_epsilon '(P) backslash partial B_epsilon(P) - iint_partial B_epsilon '(P) backslash partial V' right)$$
$endgroup$
– Joe
Mar 26 at 19:29
$begingroup$
How shall we show that the domain on the LHS and RHS of the equation below are same: $$ left( unicodex222F_partial V' - unicodex222F_partial(V' backslash B_epsilon '(P)) right) = left( iint_partial B_epsilon '(P) backslash partial B_epsilon(P) - iint_partial B_epsilon '(P) backslash partial V' right)$$
$endgroup$
– Joe
Mar 26 at 19:29
$begingroup$
@Joe The $LHS$ says "integrate over all of $partial V'$, then integrate over $partial (V' backslash B_epsilon '(P))$, and subtract". Since we are subtracting, the integrals over the intersection of these two sets cancel, so the remainder is the integral over the piece of $partial V'$ not in $partial (V' backslash B_epsilon '(P))$, minus the integral over the piece of $partial (V' backslash B_epsilon '(P))$ not in $partial V'$. The first of these domains is the circle referenced above, and the second of these domains is the hemisphere referenced above.
$endgroup$
– jawheele
Mar 26 at 19:38
$begingroup$
@Joe The $LHS$ says "integrate over all of $partial V'$, then integrate over $partial (V' backslash B_epsilon '(P))$, and subtract". Since we are subtracting, the integrals over the intersection of these two sets cancel, so the remainder is the integral over the piece of $partial V'$ not in $partial (V' backslash B_epsilon '(P))$, minus the integral over the piece of $partial (V' backslash B_epsilon '(P))$ not in $partial V'$. The first of these domains is the circle referenced above, and the second of these domains is the hemisphere referenced above.
$endgroup$
– jawheele
Mar 26 at 19:38
add a comment |
Thanks for contributing an answer to Mathematics Stack Exchange!
- Please be sure to answer the question. Provide details and share your research!
But avoid …
- Asking for help, clarification, or responding to other answers.
- Making statements based on opinion; back them up with references or personal experience.
Use MathJax to format equations. MathJax reference.
To learn more, see our tips on writing great answers.
Sign up or log in
StackExchange.ready(function ()
StackExchange.helpers.onClickDraftSave('#login-link');
);
Sign up using Google
Sign up using Facebook
Sign up using Email and Password
Post as a guest
Required, but never shown
StackExchange.ready(
function ()
StackExchange.openid.initPostLogin('.new-post-login', 'https%3a%2f%2fmath.stackexchange.com%2fquestions%2f3163006%2fclarification-on-some-surface-integrals-in-an-mse-answer%23new-answer', 'question_page');
);
Post as a guest
Required, but never shown
Sign up or log in
StackExchange.ready(function ()
StackExchange.helpers.onClickDraftSave('#login-link');
);
Sign up using Google
Sign up using Facebook
Sign up using Email and Password
Post as a guest
Required, but never shown
Sign up or log in
StackExchange.ready(function ()
StackExchange.helpers.onClickDraftSave('#login-link');
);
Sign up using Google
Sign up using Facebook
Sign up using Email and Password
Post as a guest
Required, but never shown
Sign up or log in
StackExchange.ready(function ()
StackExchange.helpers.onClickDraftSave('#login-link');
);
Sign up using Google
Sign up using Facebook
Sign up using Email and Password
Sign up using Google
Sign up using Facebook
Sign up using Email and Password
Post as a guest
Required, but never shown
Required, but never shown
Required, but never shown
Required, but never shown
Required, but never shown
Required, but never shown
Required, but never shown
Required, but never shown
Required, but never shown
$begingroup$
Think! Your question has nothing to do with elementary set theory.
$endgroup$
– William Elliot
Mar 26 at 11:57