- #1
AmagicalFishy
- 50
- 1
Hey, folks.
I'm trying to derive the surface area of a sphere using only spherical coordinates—that is, starting from spherical coordinates and ending in spherical coordinates; I don't want to convert Cartesian coordinates to spherical ones or any such thing, I want to work geometrically straight from spherical coordinates. I am trying to do this by integrating concentric rings. Here's a picture of what I'm talking about:
[tex]\phi - \text{ is the Azimuth (note; there is one instance at the center and one near the top for illustration)}\\
\theta - \text{ is the Zenith}\\
r - \text{ is the radius of the circle currently being integrated} \\
R - \text{ is the radius of the sphere}[/tex]
I began simply by deriving the equation for the circumference of any circle:
[tex]\int_0^{2\pi}\!r\ \mathrm{d}\phi[/tex]
(The arc-length is the circle's radius multiplied by the angle; d[itex]\phi[/itex] is the infinitesimal angle, so the integrand is the infinitesimal arc-length.)
In a sphere, the radius r of the integrated-circles varies according to the Zenith. The radius is:
[tex]r = R sin{\theta}[/tex]
Then, the circumference of any given circle within the sphere, at a height designated by θ, is:
[tex]\int_0^{2\pi}R sin{\theta} \ \mathrm{d}\phi[/tex]
That is, the radius of a circle multiplied by the infinitesimal angle, from zero to two-pi, as shown above, will give you the circumference of that circle.
Now, we want the integral to sum all of the circles' circumferences of the sphere, so θ has to move from top-to-bottom. The limits of integration on θ are therefore from zero to pi, and the whole integral is:
[tex]\int_0^\pi \int_0^{2\pi}\! \!R sin{\theta} \ \ \mathrm{d}\phi \ \mathrm{d}\theta[/tex]
This evaluates to: 4[itex]\pi[/itex]R
... which is close, but wrong. If I threw in another R, life would be good, but I can't well do that without knowing why. I've thought of why I should need another R, but I can't figure anything out.
Where am I missing an R factor, and why should I be factoring it in? Everything above makes pretty intuitive sense to me, and I can't point out where or why I would add in another R. Though it's often the case that I'm making a dumb mistake.
Thanks. :)
I'm trying to derive the surface area of a sphere using only spherical coordinates—that is, starting from spherical coordinates and ending in spherical coordinates; I don't want to convert Cartesian coordinates to spherical ones or any such thing, I want to work geometrically straight from spherical coordinates. I am trying to do this by integrating concentric rings. Here's a picture of what I'm talking about:
[tex]\phi - \text{ is the Azimuth (note; there is one instance at the center and one near the top for illustration)}\\
\theta - \text{ is the Zenith}\\
r - \text{ is the radius of the circle currently being integrated} \\
R - \text{ is the radius of the sphere}[/tex]
I began simply by deriving the equation for the circumference of any circle:
[tex]\int_0^{2\pi}\!r\ \mathrm{d}\phi[/tex]
(The arc-length is the circle's radius multiplied by the angle; d[itex]\phi[/itex] is the infinitesimal angle, so the integrand is the infinitesimal arc-length.)
In a sphere, the radius r of the integrated-circles varies according to the Zenith. The radius is:
[tex]r = R sin{\theta}[/tex]
Then, the circumference of any given circle within the sphere, at a height designated by θ, is:
[tex]\int_0^{2\pi}R sin{\theta} \ \mathrm{d}\phi[/tex]
That is, the radius of a circle multiplied by the infinitesimal angle, from zero to two-pi, as shown above, will give you the circumference of that circle.
Now, we want the integral to sum all of the circles' circumferences of the sphere, so θ has to move from top-to-bottom. The limits of integration on θ are therefore from zero to pi, and the whole integral is:
[tex]\int_0^\pi \int_0^{2\pi}\! \!R sin{\theta} \ \ \mathrm{d}\phi \ \mathrm{d}\theta[/tex]
This evaluates to: 4[itex]\pi[/itex]R
... which is close, but wrong. If I threw in another R, life would be good, but I can't well do that without knowing why. I've thought of why I should need another R, but I can't figure anything out.
Where am I missing an R factor, and why should I be factoring it in? Everything above makes pretty intuitive sense to me, and I can't point out where or why I would add in another R. Though it's often the case that I'm making a dumb mistake.
Thanks. :)