Jacobian in spherical coordinates?

In summary: So, the surface-element vector is just what you would expect, given the surface S in parameter form.The surface-element vector is defined as a vector perpendicular to the surface and of the length of the area element. If you have given the surface S in parameter formS: \quad \vec{r}=\vec{r}(u,v),where u and v are real parameters, then the surface-element vector is given by\mathrm{d} \vec{A}=\mathrm{d} u \mathrm{d} v \frac{\partial \vec{r}}{\partial u} \times \frac{\partial \vec{r}}{\
  • #1
Uan
14
0
Hi,

Started to learn about Jacobians recently and found something I do not understand.

Say there is a vector field F(r, phi, theta), and I want to find the flux across the surface of a sphere. eg:

∫∫F⋅dA


Do I need to use the Jacobian if the function is already in spherical coordinates?

My notes has an similar example that show you do use the Jacobian but I do not understand why. My understanding is you only use the Jacobian when there is a change in coordinates, but the function F is already in the desired coordinate system.

Thanks!
Uan
 
Last edited:
Physics news on Phys.org
  • #2
Hi Uan! Welcome to PF! :smile:
Uan said:
Do I need to use the Jacobian if the function is already in spherical coordinates?

My notes has an similar example that show you do use the Jacobian but I do not understand why. My understanding is you only use the Jacobian when there is a change in coordinates, but the function F is already in the desired coordinate system.

Suppose you want to find a volume (or area) by integrating, and everything is already in spherical coordinates …

you still need to use the jacobian (instead of just drdθdφ) because volume (or area) is defined in terms of cartesian (x,y,z) coordinates, so you have made a transformation!

Similarly, flux is defined in terms of cartesian coordinates. :wink:
 
  • #3
tiny-tim said:
Hi Uan! Welcome to PF! :smile:
you still need to use the jacobian (instead of just drdθdφ) because volume (or area) is defined in terms of cartesian (x,y,z) coordinates, so you have made a transformation!

Ok that makes sense.

One other question...

How do they get the side lengths r*d(theta) and r*sin(theta)*d(phi) of element dA in the diagram below?

3LPIA.jpg
 
  • #4
Hi Uan! :smile:
Uan said:
How do they get the side lengths r*d(theta) and r*sin(theta)*d(phi) of element dA in the diagram below?

rdθ (the length of the side of A) is length of the side of that triangle with two sides r and angle dθ …

so it's 2rsin(dθ/2), = 2r(dθ/2), = rdθ :wink:

(alternatively, if you're happy using arc-length instead of "straight" length, then the arc-length is rdθ by definition)


and the other one is calculated the same way, except that the side of the triangle is rsinθ instead of r
 
  • #5
tiny-tim said:
Hi Uan! :smile:rdθ (the length of the side of A) is length of the side of that triangle with two sides r and angle dθ …

so it's 2rsin(dθ/2), = 2r(dθ/2), = rdθ :wink:

(alternatively, if you're happy using arc-length instead of "straight" length, then the arc-length is rdθ by definition)


and the other one is calculated the same way, except that the side of the triangle is rsinθ instead of r

Ohh yeaahhh! Small angle approximation duh! Thanks tiny-tim! I really appreciate your help!

By the way, I derived it as rsin(dθ), = rdθ, as when the angle dθ goes infinitely small in the triangle with sidelengths r, r and dθ (I've redrawn it), its like it has 2 right angles (180° ~= 90° + 90° + ~0°) so hence rsin(dθ), = rdθ



My way is correct yes?
How did you get your 2s in 2rsin(dθ/2)?

(Time for F1 break)
 
Last edited by a moderator:
  • #6
(what's "F1 break"?)
Uan said:
By the way, I derived it as rsin(dθ), = rdθ, as when the angle dθ goes infinitely small in the triangle with sidelengths r, r and dθ (I've redrawn it), its like it has 2 right angles (180° ~= 90° + 90° + ~0°) so hence rsin(dθ), = rdθ

My way is correct yes?
How did you get your 2s in 2rsin(dθ/2)?

i used a triangle with two equal sides, and split it in two to make two right-angled triangles, so that my result of 2rsin(dθ/2) was precise

your triangle is not precise :wink:
 
  • Like
Likes 1 person
  • #7
tiny-tim said:
i used a triangle with two equal sides, and split it in two to make two right-angled triangles, so that my result of 2rsin(dθ/2) was precise

your triangle is not precise :wink:

Ah yes! That works out beautifully! Cheers! :thumbs:

(what's "F1 break"?)

(Formula 1 Qualifying at Spa! :wink:)
 
  • #8
Of course, for the spherical shell it's pretty easy to get the surface vector element [itex]\mathrm{d}^2 \vec{A}[/itex] in this geometrical way, but it can become difficult for more complicated shapes. Thus, here the general way to get it.

The surface-element vector is defined as a vector perpendicular to the surface and of the length of the area element. If you have given the surface [itex]S[/itex] in parameter form
[tex]S: \quad \vec{r}=\vec{r}(u,v),[/tex]
where [itex]u[/itex] and [itex]v[/itex] are real parameters, then the surface-element vector is given by
[tex]\mathrm{d} \vec{A}=\mathrm{d} u \mathrm{d} v \frac{\partial \vec{r}}{\partial u} \times \frac{\partial \vec{r}}{\partial v}.[/tex]
That's so, because obviously this vector is perpendicular to the two (by assumption linearly independent) tangent vectors [itex]\partial_u \vec{r}[/itex] and [itex]\partial_v \vec{r}[/itex] and thus to all tangent vectors of the surface in the point under consideration, and the cross product has the magnitude corresponding to the infinitesimal parallelogram spanned by the vectors [itex]\mathrm{d} u \partial_u \vec{r}[/itex] and [itex]\mathrm{d} v \partial_v \vec{r}[/itex]. You only must be careful concerning the orientation of the surface element, beause obviously it switches sign when you change the order of the parameters, because the cross product in skew symmetric.

For the sphere you take
[tex]\vec{r}=R \begin{pmatrix}
\cos \varphi \sin \vartheta \\ \sin \varphi \sin \vartheta \\ \cos \vartheta
\end{pmatrix}[/tex]
with [itex]u=\vartheta[/itex] and [itex]v=\varphi[/itex]. This gives
[tex]\mathrm{d} \vec{A} =\mathrm{d} \vartheta \mathrm{d} \varphi R^2 \begin{pmatrix} \cos \varphi \cos \vartheta \\ \sin \varphi \cos \vartheta \\ -\sin \vartheta \end{pmatrix} \times
\begin{pmatrix}
-\sin \varphi \sin \vartheta \\ -\cos \varphi \sin \vartheta \\ 0
\end{pmatrix}=R^2 \mathrm{d} \vartheta \mathrm{d} \varphi \begin{pmatrix}
\cos \varphi \sin \vartheta \\ \sin \varphi \sin \vartheta \\ \cos \vartheta
\end{pmatrix}[/tex].
For the full sphere the parameters run over the ranges [itex]\vartheta=(0,\pi)[/itex] and [itex]\varphi \in [0,2 \pi)[/itex].
 

Related to Jacobian in spherical coordinates?

What is the Jacobian in spherical coordinates?

The Jacobian in spherical coordinates is a mathematical concept that represents the change in the volume element when transforming from one coordinate system to another. It is used to calculate integrals in spherical coordinate systems and is a crucial tool in many fields, including physics, engineering, and mathematics.

How is the Jacobian in spherical coordinates calculated?

The Jacobian in spherical coordinates is calculated by taking the determinant of the Jacobian matrix, which is a matrix of partial derivatives of the new coordinate system with respect to the old one. This matrix is then multiplied by the absolute value of the determinant of the transformation matrix, which is the determinant of the matrix of partial derivatives of the old coordinate system with respect to the new one.

What is the significance of the Jacobian in spherical coordinates?

The Jacobian in spherical coordinates is significant because it allows for the transformation of integrals from one coordinate system to another. It also plays an essential role in solving differential equations and is used in many physical and engineering applications, such as calculating electric and magnetic fields, fluid flow, and heat transfer.

What is the relationship between the Jacobian and the metric tensor in spherical coordinates?

The Jacobian in spherical coordinates is directly related to the metric tensor, which is a mathematical object that describes the relationship between the infinitesimal elements of length in a given coordinate system. The Jacobian is equal to the square root of the determinant of the metric tensor, making it a crucial component in calculating the metric tensor in spherical coordinates.

Are there any limitations or assumptions when using the Jacobian in spherical coordinates?

While the Jacobian in spherical coordinates is a powerful tool, it does have some limitations and assumptions. It assumes that the coordinate system is orthogonal, meaning that the coordinate axes are perpendicular to each other. It also assumes that the coordinate system is smooth and that the transformation between coordinate systems is one-to-one. These assumptions may not always hold, and the Jacobian may not be applicable in those cases.

Similar threads

  • Calculus and Beyond Homework Help
Replies
2
Views
2K
Replies
1
Views
1K
Replies
1
Views
1K
Replies
5
Views
3K
Replies
11
Views
5K
  • Calculus
Replies
15
Views
3K
Replies
2
Views
849
Replies
3
Views
2K
Back
Top