Checking the Solution to -√2: Is It Right?

In summary, the conversation discusses the solution to exercise 7 in section 10.9 of Apostol's Calculus Vol II (2nd ed). The OP concludes that the book's answer of ##-\sqrt{2}## is wrong, based on the fact that the integrand ##(x+y)## is always positive along the specified path and the length of the path. The conversation also mentions the possibility of an errata in the book and suggests contacting the publisher for a list of errors. The final point made is that the integral can be easily calculated without pencil and paper by considering the average value of the integrand on each segment.
  • #1
zenterix
702
84
Homework Statement
Calculate the line integral with respect to arc length.

##\int_C (x+y)ds##, where ##C## is the triangle with vertices ##(0,0), (1,0)## and ##(0,1)##, traversed in a counterclockwise direction.
Relevant Equations
There are three separate paths on the triangle with parametric equations

$$\vec{r_1}(t)=\langle t,0 \rangle$$
$$\vec{r_2}(t)=\langle 1-t,t \rangle$$
$$\vec{r_3}(t)=\langle 0,1-t \rangle$$

The corresponding velocity vectors are
$$\vec{v_1}(t)=\langle 1,0 \rangle$$
$$\vec{v_2}(t)=\langle -1,1 \rangle$$
$$\vec{v_3}(t)=\langle 0,-1 \rangle$$

and speeds

$$v_1(t)=1$$
$$v_2(t)=\sqrt{2}$$
$$v_3(t)=1$$

The line integral then becomes

$$\int_C (x+y)ds = \int_0^1 t dt+\int_0^1 \sqrt{2} dt+\int_0^1 (1-t)dt$$

$$=1/2+\sqrt{2}+1-1/2$$

$$=\sqrt{2}+1$$
The answer at the end of the book says ##-\sqrt{2}##.

Is this correct or is my solution correct?

Here is a depiction of the path where we are integrating

1675366647724.jpeg
 
Physics news on Phys.org
  • #2
We can see the book solution is wrong without doing any integrating. The integrand ##(x+y)## is positive everywhere along the line of integration, and ##ds## is always positive by definition. So the integral has to be positive. So it can't be ##-\sqrt 2##.
Your approach looks reasonable.
 
  • Like
Likes jim mcnamara, zenterix and FactChecker
  • #3
Maybe we are missing some context here.
The diagram shows a specified path around the loop. The given answer works if we allow ds to be signed, e.g. going from (0,1) to (0,0) giving the opposite sign to the reverse direction. That would be how a line integral works in a vector field or in the complex plane. And complex analysis is what I associate with the name Apostol.
 
  • #4
haruspex said:
Maybe we are missing some context here.
The diagram shows a specified path around the loop. The given answer works if we allow ds to be signed, e.g. going from (0,1) to (0,0) giving the opposite sign to the reverse direction. That would be how a line integral works in a vector field or in the complex plane. And complex analysis is what I associate with the name Apostol.
My interpretation of ds would be a change of length in a parameterized path. So the counter-clockwise path has a positive ds going down the Y-axis.
 
  • #5
This is exercise 7 in section 10.9 of Apostol, Calculus Vol II (2nd ed). For context, on pages 329-330, the following definition is given:

Let [itex]\alpha[/itex] be a path with [itex]\alpha'[/itex] continuous on [itex][a,b][/itex]. The graph of [itex]\alpha[/itex] is a rectifiable curve. In Volume I we proved that the corresponding arc length integral is given by [tex]
s(t) = \int_a^t \|\alpha'(u)\|\,du[/tex] The derivative of arc length is given by [tex]
s'(t) = \|\alpha'(t)\|.[/tex] Let [itex]\phi[/itex] be a scalar field, defined and bounded on [itex]C[/itex], the graph of [itex]\alpha[/itex]. The line integral of [itex]\phi[/itex] with respect to arc length along [itex]C[/itex] is given by [tex]
\int_C \phi\,ds = \int_a^b \phi(\alpha(t))s'(t)\,dt,[/tex] whenever the integral on the right exists.

The OP's calculations would therefore appear to be correct, and the answer given in the book is wrong. Searching for errata turned up this exchange from 2015:

shinobi20 said:
I am studying calculus using apostol, I found that some answers at the back are wrong. I tried to search for an errata copy but can't find any. Does anyone know how to get one or has a list of errors?

Greg Bernhardt said:
I would contact the publisher

I should note that I did check Wiley's website, but no errata are given there.
 
  • Like
Likes FactChecker
  • #6
As a quick check, note that, on each segment, the integral equals the average value of the integrand times the length of the segment. This average value is 1/2 on each of the segments of length one, and 1 on the segment of length sqrt(2), hence it seems the total integral is 1+sqrt(2) as stated, even with no pencil and paper computation at all. I.e. an integral is just a way of computing an average value, so when that average is obvious, little work is needed.
 
  • Like
Likes FactChecker

FAQ: Checking the Solution to -√2: Is It Right?

What does -√2 represent?

The expression -√2 represents the negative square root of 2. It is a real number that, when squared, gives the result 2, but with a negative sign in front. Numerically, -√2 is approximately -1.414.

How do I verify if -√2 is correct?

To verify if -√2 is correct, square the value and check if the result is 2. For -√2, squaring it results in (-√2)² = (-1.414)² = 2. Therefore, -√2 is indeed a valid solution.

Is -√2 a rational or irrational number?

-√2 is an irrational number. An irrational number cannot be expressed as a simple fraction of two integers. The square root of 2 is known to be irrational, and its negative counterpart retains this property.

Are there any other solutions to the equation x² = 2?

Yes, the equation x² = 2 has two solutions: √2 and -√2. Both values, when squared, yield the result 2. Therefore, both √2 and -√2 are correct solutions to the equation.

How is -√2 used in mathematics and science?

-√2 is used in various fields of mathematics and science, including geometry, algebra, and physics. It often appears in problems involving quadratic equations, trigonometric functions, and in the study of certain geometric shapes and physical phenomena.

Similar threads

Back
Top