Integral Identity: Showing LHS = RHS

In summary, the divergence theorem states that the divergence of two vectors is the sum of their individual divergence vectors.
  • #1
coverband
171
1
1. By considering, seperately, each component of the vector A, show that [tex] \iint A(u.n) ds = \iiint {(u.\nabla)A + A(\nabla.u)} dV [/tex] (A,u and n are vectors)



Homework Equations





3. Attempt at solution
L.H.S.
Let A = [tex] a\vec{i} + b\vec{j} + c\vec{k}[/tex]
[tex]
\iint (a\vec{i} + b\vec{j} + c\vec{k})[(u_1\vec{i} + u_2 \vec{j} + u_3 \vec{k}).(n_1 \vec{i} + n_2 \vec {j} + n_3 \vec{k})] ds

= \iint (a\vec{i} + b\vec{j} + c\vec{k})(u_1 n_1 + u_2 n_2 + u_3 n_3) ds

= \iint au_1n_1\vec{i} + au_2n_2\vec{i} + au_3n_3\vec{i} + bu_1n_1\vec{j} [/tex][tex]
+ bu_2n_2\vec{j} + bu_3n_3\vec{j} + cu_1n_1\vec{k} + cu_2n_2\vec{k} + cu_3n_3\vec{k} ds[/tex]

R.H.S.[tex]
\iiint(u_1a_x\vec{i}+u_1b_x\vec{j}+u_1c_x\vec{k}+u_2a_y\vec{i}+u_2b_y\vec{j}+u_2c_y\vec{k}+u_3a_z\vec{i}+u_3b_z\vec{j}+u_3c_z\vec{k}+u_1a_x\vec{i}+u_1b_y\vec{i}+u_1c_z\vec{i}+u_2a_x\vec{j}+u_2b_y\vec{j}+u_2c_z\vec{j}+u_3a_x\vec{k}+u_3b_y\vec{k}+u_3c_z\vec{k})dv[/tex]

Is this right? Where to now? Thanks
 
Last edited:
Physics news on Phys.org
  • #2
Sum it up. i,j,k's are annoying D:!
WTS
[tex]\int A_i (u.n) ds[/tex]
and
[tex]\int (u.\nabla) A_i +A_i (\nabla.u)dV[/tex]
are the same.

We are treating A_i as a scalar function, for each i=1,2,3 separately.

Erm. Let me think what the best way to proceed is lol.

[edit] Oh, I was right. You need to use a certain theorem that relates surface integrals to volume integrals. Note the dots and dels scattered around.
Haven't worked it all the way through but it should work.
[hint] [tex]\nabla . (a \vec {u})=[/tex]?
 
Last edited:
  • #3
How do you know to treat A as a scalar function?

With regard to what theorems encompass all above I would have to say the divergence theorem ?
 
  • #4
Yes, div theorem.

For all intensive purposes, a vector is just n scalars in a bracket. (ordered tuple)

Consider a=b (a,b are vectors) - we can just treat this as n scalar equations a_i=b_i.

Also, the question says to consider separately the components of each bit. That means, equate the x component, the y component, the ... etc. And the equations you get are just scalar equations.
 
  • #5
Ok. So I just considered one of the vector A's components (say [tex] A_i [/tex]).

Also I let the vector be equal to the product of a scalar function, B and a constant vector, a.

Thus equation becomes:

[tex] \iint (Ba u_1n_1 \vec{i} + Ba u_2n_2 \vec{i} + Ba u_3n_3 \vec{i}) ds [/tex][tex]

=
\iiint (u_1Ba_x \vec{i} + u_1B_xa \vec{i} + u_2Ba_y \vec{i} + u_2B_ya \vec{i} + u_3Ba_z \vec{i} + u_3B_za \vec {i} + u_1B_xa \vec {i}+ u_1B_xa \vec{i} + u_2B_xa \vec {i} + u_2Ba_x \vec {i} + u_3a_xB \vec {i} + u_3aB_x \vec {i}) dV [/tex]

Little help!
 
  • #6
Okay.
some days, you got to expand all the crap out and check each little piece.

But today is not one of those days :p
Hopefully after this exercise, you'll be able to get a feel for the kind of thing you can do before resorting to expanding everything out completely.

Can you work out a nice expression for [tex]\nabla . (f \vec{u})[/tex]? where f is a scalar function, and u is a vector-valued function.
 
  • #7
Well, I believe [tex]\nabla . (f \vec{u}) = f \nabla . (\vec{u}) + \nabla f . \vec{u} [/tex] which when [tex] \vec {u} [/tex] is constant reduces to [tex]\nabla . (f \vec{u}) = \nabla f . \vec{u} [/tex]. How does this help...
 
  • #8
yep. Usually this is written
[tex]\nabla .(fu) = f \nabla.u+(u.\nabla) f[/tex]
which resembles the RHS of the expression we want (eg, take f as a component of A).

[tex]\int \nabla . (fu) dV = \int (fu).n dS[/tex] is the divergence theorem in this case. (u and n are vectors)
Now take f to be a component of A and see if you can relate this to what we want.
Note the alternate way of writing the dV integral, by using the "product rule" relation we just derived.
 
  • #9
Hi. Sorry for delay. I was trying to digest info.

So, 1. By considering, seperately, each component of the vector A, show that [tex] \iint A(u.n) ds = \iiint {(u.\nabla)A + A(\nabla.u)} dV [/tex] (A,u and n are vectors)

So R.H.S.
[tex] = \iiint a[(u.\nabla)f + f(\nabla.u)] dV

= \iiint a{\nabla.(fu)} dV [/tex]

L.H.S.
[tex] = \iint a(fu).n ds [/tex] (due to properties of dot product)

which is true because of the divergence theorem !? Is all that right? How do you cancel the "a's" ? Is fu a vector ? Thanks
 

FAQ: Integral Identity: Showing LHS = RHS

What is integral identity?

Integral identity is a mathematical concept that states the sum of the left-hand side (LHS) and the right-hand side (RHS) of an equation are equal. It is often used in calculus and other branches of mathematics.

How is integral identity different from other identities?

Integral identity specifically deals with the integration of functions, while other identities may involve other mathematical operations such as addition, subtraction, or multiplication.

Why is it important to show LHS = RHS in integral identity?

Showcasing that the LHS is equal to the RHS in integral identity is crucial because it proves the validity of the equation and the mathematical concept being explored. It also allows for further manipulation and simplification of the equation.

What are some examples of integral identity?

One example of integral identity is the fundamental theorem of calculus, which states that the definite integral of a function is equal to the difference of its antiderivative evaluated at the upper and lower limits of integration.

Another example is the integration by parts formula, which relates the integral of a product of two functions to the integral of their derivatives.

How can one prove integral identity?

To prove integral identity, one must manipulate the equation using mathematical properties and principles until the LHS and RHS are equivalent. This can involve substitution, integration rules, and algebraic manipulation. Additionally, one can use mathematical software or calculators to verify the equality of the two sides.

Back
Top