Confused about the intergral over a sphere

In summary, the conversation discusses the integration of a function over a sphere and the confusion caused by the different conventions for spherical coordinates in mathematics and engineering. The answer depends on which coordinates are being integrated over pi and which are being integrated over 2pi. It is important to specify the coordinate system being used in order to get the correct answer.
  • #1
khkwang
60
0
I don't know the beginning part of the question is relevant, so I'll leave it out unless requested.

At the point of:

[tex]\int[/tex]sin[tex]\vartheta[/tex]d[tex]\vartheta[/tex]d[tex]\phi[/tex]

Which is to be integrated over a sphere, when integrating from 0 to pi for [tex]\vartheta[/tex] and then from 0 to 2pi for [tex]\phi[/tex], we get 4pi, which is the answer I'm looking for.

But if I integrate [tex]\vartheta[/tex] from 0 to 2pi first, then [tex]\phi[/tex] from 0 to pi, I get 0, which is definitely not the answer I'm looking for.

Can someone tell me why this is? And how I know which to integrate over pi and which to integrate over 2pi generally?
 
Mathematics news on Phys.org
  • #2
Hi! The sin(theta) comes from the way the angular coordinates are defined. So you cannot simply say that you will integrate theta from 0 to 2pi. You can check out spherical cooordinates on wikipedia and the derivation of the integral measure.

Here is a way to remember: The coordinate the goes from 0 til pi is the one in the sin() function in the integration measure, because otherwise sin() would become negative. This integral measures the area on the sphere, and it should not be possible to get a negative answer, since area is positive.

Of course, each time someone uses a spherical coordite system, they should say how it is defined.

Torquil
 
  • #3
Ah, I'm not sure I understand all that (the first part), but I understand the part about the area not being possible to be negative. Thanks.
 
  • #4
khkwang said:
I don't know the beginning part of the question is relevant, so I'll leave it out unless requested.

At the point of:

[tex]\int[/tex]sin[tex]\vartheta[/tex]d[tex]\vartheta[/tex]d[tex]\phi[/tex]

Which is to be integrated over a sphere, when integrating from 0 to pi for [tex]\vartheta[/tex] and then from 0 to 2pi for [tex]\phi[/tex], we get 4pi, which is the answer I'm looking for.

But if I integrate [tex]\vartheta[/tex] from 0 to 2pi first, then [tex]\phi[/tex] from 0 to pi, I get 0, which is definitely not the answer I'm looking for.

Can someone tell me why this is? And how I know which to integrate over pi and which to integrate over 2pi generally?
Unfortunately, to confuse the situation further, mathematics and engineering use opposite conventiions. Mathematics uses [itex]\theta[/itex] as the "longitude" and [itex]\phi[/itex] as the "co-latitude". Engineering reverses those meanings.

khkwang is using "engineering" notation, but either way, longitude goes from "180 degrees east to 180 degrees west" or a full 360 degree, [itex]2\pi[/itex] radian, circle while latitude only goes from "90 degrees south to 90 degrees west", only a difference of 180 degrees or [itex]\pi[/itex] radians.
 
  • #5
Also see the discussion at Wolfram about spherical coordinates.
 
  • #6
HallsofIvy said:
Unfortunately, to confuse the situation further, mathematics and engineering use opposite conventiions. Mathematics uses [itex]\theta[/itex] as the "longitude" and [itex]\phi[/itex] as the "co-latitude". Engineering reverses those meanings

Because of that, I use [itex]\zeta[/itex] for "zenith angle" (co-latitude, the angle from the Cartesian z-axis, [0,[itex]\pi[/itex]]) and [itex]\alpha[/itex] for "azimuth angle" (longitude, the angle from the Cartesian x-axis, [0,2[itex]\pi[/itex])).

Have any notable disasters been attributed to this difference in convention?
 
  • #7
Since, fortunately, it is only engineers who design things, not mathematicians, no!
 

FAQ: Confused about the intergral over a sphere

What is an integral over a sphere?

An integral over a sphere is a mathematical concept that involves calculating the value of a function over the surface of a sphere. This can be thought of as finding the average value of the function over the sphere.

How is an integral over a sphere different from a regular integral?

An integral over a sphere is different from a regular integral in that it involves integrating over a three-dimensional surface (the sphere) instead of a one-dimensional interval. This requires the use of spherical coordinates and a different formula for calculating the integral.

Why is an integral over a sphere important in science?

An integral over a sphere is important in science because many physical phenomena, such as electric fields and gravitational fields, have spherical symmetry. This means that their values depend only on the distance from a central point, making it necessary to integrate over a sphere to accurately describe and analyze these phenomena.

How is the integral over a sphere calculated?

The integral over a sphere is calculated using the formula: ∫∫∫f(r,θ,φ) r²sin(θ) dr dθ dφ where r, θ, and φ represent the radial, polar, and azimuthal coordinates, respectively, and f(r,θ,φ) represents the function being integrated.

What are some real-world applications of integrals over a sphere?

Integrals over a sphere have many real-world applications in fields such as physics, engineering, and astronomy. For example, they are used to calculate the gravitational potential energy of a mass distribution or the electric potential of a charged sphere. They are also used in image processing and computer graphics to create three-dimensional models of objects and surfaces.

Back
Top