Stokes' theorem and surface integrals

In summary, Ric's summary of the conversation explains that the surface integral computed using the curl of the vector field over a 2-dimensional surface can be written as the determinant of the jacobian multiplied by the determinant of the 2nd rank tensor over the same surface. However, if there is a 2 in the last equation, the algebraic expression is incorrect.
  • #1
dRic2
Gold Member
890
225
TL;DR Summary
Compute the integral of the "curl" of the vector field ##A_i(x_i)## over a 2-dimensional surface.
Hi,

So my goal is to compute the integral of the "curl" of the vector field ##A_i(x_i)## over a 2-dimensional surface. Following a physics book that I am reading, I introduce the antisymmetric 2-nd rank tensor ##\Omega_{ij}##, defined as:
$$\Omega_{ij} = \frac {\partial A_i}{\partial x_j} - \frac {\partial A_j}{\partial x_i}$$
then, from what I gather reading the Wikipedia page (https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Surface_integral), if the surface can be parametrized by a set of 2 variables ##u## and ##v## I should be able to write the surface element as ##dudv## times the determinant of the jacobian:
$$ \frac {\partial x_i}{\partial u} \frac {\partial x_j}{\partial v} - \frac {\partial x_j}{\partial u} \frac {\partial x_i}{\partial v}$$
Putting all together I get:
$$\int_S \left( \frac {\partial A_i}{\partial x_j} - \frac {\partial A_j}{\partial x_i} \right) \left( \frac {\partial x_i}{\partial u} \frac {\partial x_j}{\partial v} - \frac {\partial x_j}{\partial u} \frac {\partial x_i}{\partial v} \right) dudv$$
Using the chain rule, I can simplfy the expression to yield:
$$ \int_S \left( \frac {\partial A_i}{\partial v} \frac {\partial x_i}{\partial u} - \frac {\partial x_i}{\partial v} \frac {\partial A_i}{\partial u} - \frac {\partial A_j}{\partial u} \frac {\partial x_j}{\partial v} + \frac {\partial x_j}{\partial u} \frac {\partial A_j}{\partial v} \right) dudv = 2 \int_S \left( \frac {\partial A_i}{\partial v} \frac {\partial x_i}{\partial u} - \frac {\partial x_i}{\partial v} \frac {\partial A_i}{\partial u} \right) dudv
$$
But I am pretty sure there should not be a 2 in the last equation. Is my reasoning wrong?

Thanks
Ric
 
Last edited:
Physics news on Phys.org
  • #2
I think you should check your distributions from the second-to-last line. From what I got, the terms on the last line should all be distinct.

This is assuming that your reasoning is correct, though. Algebraically, your final answer does not look right.
 
Last edited:
  • #3
In the last line ##u## and ##v## were swapped. I corrected the OP for clarity.
 
  • #4
dRic2 said:
Summary:: Compute the integral of the "curl" of the vector field ##A_i(x_i)## over a 2-dimensional surface.

Hi,

So my goal is to compute the integral of the "curl" of the vector field ##A_i(x_i)## over a 2-dimensional surface. Following a physics book that I am reading, I introduce the antisymmetric 2-nd rank tensor ##\Omega_{ij}##, defined as:
$$\Omega_{ij} = \frac {\partial A_i}{\partial x_j} - \frac {\partial A_j}{\partial x_i}$$
then, from what I gather reading the Wikipedia page (https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Surface_integral), if the surface can be parametrized by a set of 2 variables ##u## and ##v## I should be able to write the surface element as ##dudv## times the determinant of the jacobian:
$$ \frac {\partial x_i}{\partial u} \frac {\partial x_j}{\partial v} - \frac {\partial x_j}{\partial u} \frac {\partial x_i}{\partial v}$$
Putting all together I get:
$$\int_S \left( \frac {\partial A_i}{\partial x_j} - \frac {\partial A_j}{\partial x_i} \right) \left( \frac {\partial x_i}{\partial u} \frac {\partial x_j}{\partial v} - \frac {\partial x_j}{\partial u} \frac {\partial x_i}{\partial v} \right) dudv$$
Using the chain rule, I can simplfy the expression to yield:
$$ \int_S \left( \frac {\partial A_i}{\partial v} \frac {\partial x_i}{\partial u} - \frac {\partial x_i}{\partial v} \frac {\partial A_i}{\partial u} - \frac {\partial A_j}{\partial u} \frac {\partial x_j}{\partial v} + \frac {\partial x_j}{\partial u} \frac {\partial A_j}{\partial v} \right) dudv = 2 \int_S \left( \frac {\partial A_i}{\partial v} \frac {\partial x_i}{\partial u} - \frac {\partial x_i}{\partial v} \frac {\partial A_i}{\partial u} \right) dudv
$$
But I am pretty sure there should not be a 2 in the last equation. Is my reasoning wrong?

Thanks
Ric

There are [itex]n(n-1)[/itex] possible off-diagonal values of [itex](i,j)[/itex]. The way you have set your integral up, you only need the [itex]\frac12 n(n-1)[/itex] terms where [itex]i < j[/itex]. After changing variables to [itex]u[/itex] and [itex]v[/itex] your integrand is symmetric in [itex]i[/itex] and [itex]j[/itex]; hence your answer is twice as large as it should be.
 
  • Like
Likes jim mcnamara and dRic2
  • #5
Oh I see. Since ##dx_i \wedge dx_j = - dx_j \wedge dx_i## I was counting the same surface twice!

Even though I don't know differential geometry at all, I read on Wikipedia (https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Differential_form) that the "differential 2-form" (whatever that is...) is defined for i<j in order to give the correct surface element. I didn't understand most of the article but it seems to me that it says the same thing that you said. Thanks!
 
  • #6
dRic2 said:
Oh I see. Since ##dx_i \wedge dx_j = - dx_j \wedge dx_i## I was counting the same surface twice!

Even though I don't know differential geometry at all, I read on Wikipedia (https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Differential_form) that the "differential 2-form" (whatever that is...) is defined for i<j in order to give the correct surface element. I didn't understand most of the article but it seems to me that it says the same thing that you said. Thanks!

Note that [tex]
\int \partial_jA_i\,dx_i \wedge dx_j = \int (\partial_2A_1-\partial_1A_2)\,dx_1 \wedge dx_2
+ \int (\partial_3A_2-\partial_2A_3)\,dx_2 \wedge dx_3
+ \int (\partial_3A_1-\partial_1A_3)\,dx_1 \wedge dx_3[/tex]
 
  • Like
Likes dRic2

FAQ: Stokes' theorem and surface integrals

What is Stokes' theorem?

Stokes' theorem is a fundamental theorem in vector calculus that relates a surface integral over a closed surface to a line integral around the boundary of that surface. It is named after the mathematician George Gabriel Stokes.

What is the significance of Stokes' theorem?

Stokes' theorem allows us to calculate the flux of a vector field through a closed surface by evaluating a line integral around the boundary of that surface. It is a powerful tool in many areas of physics and engineering, including fluid mechanics and electromagnetism.

How is Stokes' theorem related to the divergence theorem?

Stokes' theorem is a higher-dimensional generalization of the divergence theorem. While the divergence theorem relates a volume integral to a surface integral, Stokes' theorem relates a surface integral to a line integral.

Can Stokes' theorem be applied to any surface?

Stokes' theorem can be applied to any smooth surface in three-dimensional space, as long as the surface is closed (meaning it has no boundary) and oriented consistently with the direction of the line integral.

How is Stokes' theorem used in real-world applications?

Stokes' theorem is used in many real-world applications, such as calculating the circulation of a fluid around a closed loop, determining the magnetic field around a current-carrying wire, and analyzing the flow of air over an airplane wing.

Similar threads

Back
Top