Symmetry of an Integral of a Dot product

In summary, the symmetry of an integral of a dot product refers to the property that certain integrals remain unchanged when the order of the variables in the dot product is reversed. This property is significant in various fields, including physics and engineering, as it simplifies calculations and helps to identify symmetrical relationships in multidimensional spaces. The integral's symmetry can be exploited to derive important results and to facilitate the analysis of vector fields and other mathematical constructs.
  • #1
Skaiserollz89
9
0
Homework Statement
Show that $$\int\int_{-\infty}^{\infty}d\vec{r}d\vec{r'}W(\vec{r})W(\vec{r'}) \vec{r} \cdot \vec{r'}=0$$ due to symmetry. Here, $$W(\vec{r})$$ is a circle function with a value of one inside its radius R and 0 beyond the radius R. Note that ##\vec{r} \cdot \vec{r'}=|\vec{r}| |\vec{r'}|cos(\phi)##, where ##\phi## is the angle between vectors ##\vec{r}## and ##\vec{r'}##.
Relevant Equations
$$\int\int_{-\infty}^{\infty}drdr'W(\vec{r})W(\vec{r'}) \vec{r} \cdot \vec{r'}=0 ;$$
$$\vec{r}=r_x\hat{i}+r_y\hat{y};$$
$$\vec{r'}=r'_x\hat{i}+r'_y\hat{y};$$
This homework statement comes from a research paper that was published in SPIE Optical Engineering. The integral $$\int\int_{-\infty}^{\infty}drdr'W(\vec{r})W(\vec{r'}) \vec{r} \cdot \vec{r'}=0$$ is an assumtion that is made via the following statement from the paper : "Since ##\int\int_{-\infty}^{\infty}drdr'W(\vec{r})W(\vec{r'}) \vec{r} \cdot \vec{r'}=0## , terms that are functions of either ##\vec{r}## or ##\vec{r'}##, and not both, can be added without changing the result of the integration. "

I am just trying to justify how the integral equals zero.

My attempt:

$$\int\int_{-\infty}^{\infty}d\vec{r}d\vec{r'}W(\vec{r})W(\vec{r'}) \vec{r} \cdot \vec{r' };$$ where ##W(\vec{r})=0## when ##r>R## and
##W(\vec{r})=1## when ##r\le R.##

Here I change my integration bounds to reflect the constrains of ##W(\vec{r})## and ##W(\vec{r'})##.

$$\int_{0}^{R}\int_{0}^{R}d\vec{r}d\vec{r'} \vec{r} \cdot \vec{r'}$$

$$\int_{0}^{R}\int_{0}^{R}d\vec{r}d\vec{r'} |\vec{r}| |\vec{r'}|cos(\phi)$$

$$cos(\phi) \int_{0}^{R}|\vec{r}|dr\int_{0}^{R} r'dr'$$

$$cos(\phi) \int_{0}^{R}r dr\int_{0}^{R}r' dr'$$

$$cos(\phi)(\frac{1}{2}R^2)(\frac{1}{2}R^2)$$

$$=\frac{R^4}{4}cos(\phi)$$

Im not sure If I am skipping steps or missing the point all together, but I dont see how this will go to zero. Any assistant and guidance would be greatly appreciated so I might be able to understand this paper I am reading a little bit more.
 
Last edited:
Physics news on Phys.org
  • #2
In terms of plane polar coordinates [itex](r,\phi)[/itex] and [itex](r,\phi')[/itex] you have [itex]\theta = \phi - \phi'[/itex]. To integrate over a circle in the [itex](r',\phi')[/itex] you must not only integrate with respect to [itex]r'[/itex] from 0 to [itex]R[/itex], but also with respect to [itex]\phi'[/itex] between 0 and [itex]2\pi[/itex]. The integral of [itex]\cos(\phi - \phi')[/itex] over a complete period of [itex]2\pi[/itex] is zero, so the entire integral is zero.
 
  • #3
pasmith said:
In terms of plane polar coordinates [itex](r,\phi)[/itex] and [itex](r,\phi')[/itex] you have [itex]\theta = \phi - \phi'[/itex]. To integrate over a circle in the [itex](r',\phi')[/itex] you must not only integrate with respect to [itex]r'[/itex] from 0 to [itex]R[/itex], but also with respect to [itex]\phi'[/itex] between 0 and [itex]2\pi[/itex]. The integral of [itex]\cos(\phi - \phi')[/itex] over a complete period of [itex]2\pi[/itex] is zero, so the entire integral is zero.
So the statement in the published paper is assuming that integration with respect to ##\phi## must also be performed for it to go to zero, without explicitly saying so?
 
  • #4
Skaiserollz89 said:
So the statement in the published paper is assuming that integration with respect to ##\phi## must also be performed for it to go to zero, without explicitly saying so?
The original integral you wrote has integration variables ##\vec r## and ##\vec r'##. That's not the same as ##r## and ##r'## as you later wrote.
 
  • #5
vela said:
The original integral you wrote has integration variables ##\vec r## and ##\vec r'##. That's not the same as ##r## and ##r'## as you later wrote.
I agree. After performing the dot product I am working with scalars at that point, correct? So ##d\vec r## and ##d\vec r'## goes to ##dr## and ##dr'##? Do you think I am missing something?
 
  • #6
Skaiserollz89 said:
I agree. After performing the dot product I am working with scalars at that point, correct?
No, that's not correct. The dot product makes the integrand a scalar, but that has no bearing on the region over which you're integrating.
 
  • #7
vela said:
No, that's not correct. The dot product makes the integrand a scalar, but that has no bearing on the region over which you're integrating.
Thank you for clarifying. But I think I am a little confused. Would you mind elaborating? I think you are saying that my line that reads ##cos(\phi) \int_{0}^{R}r dr\int_{0}^{R}r' dr'## is incorrect, and should be ##cos(\phi) \int_{0}^{R}r d\vec{r}\int_{0}^{R}r'd\vec{r'}## which simplifies to

$$cos(\phi) \int_{0}^{R}r \hat{r}d{r}\int_{0}^{R}r'\hat{r'}d{r'}.$$

If this notation is correct, how do I continue on from here?
 
Last edited:
  • #8
In two dimensions, the area element ##d\vec r## is equal to ##dx\,dy## in Cartesian coordinates or ##r\,dr\,d\phi## in polar coordinates. (You could, of course, swap the order of ##x## and ##y## or ##r## and ##\theta##.) The advantage of ##d\vec r## is that the notation is independent of any choice of coordinate system.

Here's a simple example:
$$\int (\vec r \cdot \hat i)\,d\vec r = \iint (\vec r \cdot \hat i)\,r\,dr\,d\phi= \iint (\vec r \cdot \hat i)\,dx\,dy$$ Then you can evaluate the dot product in whatever way is convenient and appropriate for the problem, e.g.,
$$\int (\vec r \cdot \hat i)\,d\vec r = \iint (r\cos\phi)\,r\,dr\,d\phi= \iint x\,dx\,dy$$
 
  • Like
Likes Skaiserollz89
  • #9
Great! I think I've got it now. Ill attempt to work it through here...

Given the initial problem
$$ \int_{-\infty}^{\infty}\int_{-\infty}^{\infty}d\vec{r}d\vec{r'}W(\vec{r})W(\vec{r'}) \vec{r} \cdot \vec{r'}$$

It seems like you are referring to Green's Theorem to turn a line integral into a double integral.

From your example, and from the constraints of ##W(r)## and ##W(r')## on the radius I have...

$$\int_{0}^{R}\int_{0}^{2\pi}\int_{0}^{R}\int_{0}^{2\pi} rdrd\phi r'dr'd\phi' |\vec{r}| |\vec{r'}| cos(\phi-\phi') ,$$

where ##\phi-\phi'## is the angle between the two vectors ##\vec{r}## and ##\vec{r'}##. Separating terms I have

$$\int_{0}^{R}r^2dr \int_{0}^{R}r'^2dr'\int_{0}^{2\pi}\int_{0}^{2\pi} d\phi d\phi' cos(\phi-\phi') ,$$

Noting the trig identity that ##cos(\phi-\phi')=cos(\phi)cos(\phi')+sin(\phi)sin(\phi')##,
$$\int_{0}^{R}r^2dr \int_{0}^{R}r'^2dr'\left[\int_{0}^{2\pi}\int_{0}^{2\pi} d\phi d\phi' cos(\phi)cos(\phi')+ \int_{0}^{2\pi}\int_{0}^{2\pi} d\phi d\phi'sin(\phi)sin(\phi')\right] ,$$

$$\int_{0}^{R}r^2dr \int_{0}^{R}r'^2dr'\left[\int_{0}^{2\pi}cos(\phi)d\phi\int_{0}^{2\pi} cos(\phi')d\phi'+ \int_{0}^{2\pi}sin(\phi)d\phi\int_{0}^{2\pi} sin(\phi')d\phi'\right] ,$$

where the terms in the square brackets all individually go to zero due to symmetry in the integration over the entire period of the function, namely...
$$\int_{0}^{2\pi}cos(\phi)d\phi=0 \hspace{.5cm}\text{ and }\hspace{.5cm} \int_{0}^{2\pi}sin(\phi)d\phi=0.$$

Therefore;
$$\int_{-\infty}^{\infty}\int_{-\infty}^{\infty}d\vec{r}d\vec{r'}W(\vec{r})W(\vec{r'}) \vec{r} \cdot \vec{r'}=0$$
 
  • #10
Easier is [tex]\begin{split}
\int_0^{2\pi}\int_0^{2\pi} \cos(\phi - \phi')\,d\phi\,d\phi' &= \int_0^{2\pi}\left[ \sin(\phi-\phi') \right]_{\phi=0}^{\phi = 2\pi}\,d\phi' \\
&= \int_0^{2\pi}\sin(2\pi - \phi') - \sin (-\phi')\,d\phi' \\
&= \int_0^{2\pi}0\,d\phi' \\ &= 0.\end{split}[/tex]
 

Similar threads

Replies
9
Views
856
Replies
9
Views
1K
Replies
4
Views
1K
Replies
1
Views
1K
Replies
7
Views
2K
Replies
6
Views
2K
Back
Top