Surface integral of an infinitesimal volume = 0?












1












$begingroup$


Cracking open the texts for the first time in a while, I'm prepping for school with a review of vector calc. Question 1 asks to derive the expressions for divergence for cartesian, cylindrical and spherical coordinates, based on the equation



$$nablacdotvec{f} = lim_{Delta V rightarrow 0} frac{1}{Delta V} left[ iint vec{f}cdot dvec{s} right]$$



(Also refreshing myself on latex, ooint seems to not be a thing in SE?)



So for a given point $P$, and the vector $vec{f}(P)$ at that specific point, I calculate the dot product between that vector and the outward facing surface area over the infinitesimal volume surrounding $P$.



The problem is, if I'm looking at both sides of that little $dV$, wrt each axis, the products should cancel out exactly. So for the surfaces normal to the x-axis, we get



$$f_x(P)hat{i} cdot dydzhat{i} + f_x(P)hat{i} cdot dydz left(hat{-i}right) = 0$$



I figure the most likely issues are that I either have something like a sign error, or that integrating $vec{f}cdot dvec{s}$ should yield zero, and I'm not doing the calculus that I should be doing. I think it isn't the former, because $vec{f}(P)$ should be the same regardless of which side you're taking the product with. Is it the latter?






vector-analysis







share|cite|improve this question









$endgroup$












  • $begingroup$
    The code is oiint, but I can't get that one to work, either (though I could swear I've seen it before).
    $endgroup$
    – Paul Sinclair
    Jan 24 at 13:09
















1












$begingroup$


Cracking open the texts for the first time in a while, I'm prepping for school with a review of vector calc. Question 1 asks to derive the expressions for divergence for cartesian, cylindrical and spherical coordinates, based on the equation



$$nablacdotvec{f} = lim_{Delta V rightarrow 0} frac{1}{Delta V} left[ iint vec{f}cdot dvec{s} right]$$



(Also refreshing myself on latex, ooint seems to not be a thing in SE?)



So for a given point $P$, and the vector $vec{f}(P)$ at that specific point, I calculate the dot product between that vector and the outward facing surface area over the infinitesimal volume surrounding $P$.



The problem is, if I'm looking at both sides of that little $dV$, wrt each axis, the products should cancel out exactly. So for the surfaces normal to the x-axis, we get



$$f_x(P)hat{i} cdot dydzhat{i} + f_x(P)hat{i} cdot dydz left(hat{-i}right) = 0$$



I figure the most likely issues are that I either have something like a sign error, or that integrating $vec{f}cdot dvec{s}$ should yield zero, and I'm not doing the calculus that I should be doing. I think it isn't the former, because $vec{f}(P)$ should be the same regardless of which side you're taking the product with. Is it the latter?






vector-analysis







share|cite|improve this question









$endgroup$












  • $begingroup$
    The code is oiint, but I can't get that one to work, either (though I could swear I've seen it before).
    $endgroup$
    – Paul Sinclair
    Jan 24 at 13:09














1












1








1





$begingroup$


Cracking open the texts for the first time in a while, I'm prepping for school with a review of vector calc. Question 1 asks to derive the expressions for divergence for cartesian, cylindrical and spherical coordinates, based on the equation



$$nablacdotvec{f} = lim_{Delta V rightarrow 0} frac{1}{Delta V} left[ iint vec{f}cdot dvec{s} right]$$



(Also refreshing myself on latex, ooint seems to not be a thing in SE?)



So for a given point $P$, and the vector $vec{f}(P)$ at that specific point, I calculate the dot product between that vector and the outward facing surface area over the infinitesimal volume surrounding $P$.



The problem is, if I'm looking at both sides of that little $dV$, wrt each axis, the products should cancel out exactly. So for the surfaces normal to the x-axis, we get



$$f_x(P)hat{i} cdot dydzhat{i} + f_x(P)hat{i} cdot dydz left(hat{-i}right) = 0$$



I figure the most likely issues are that I either have something like a sign error, or that integrating $vec{f}cdot dvec{s}$ should yield zero, and I'm not doing the calculus that I should be doing. I think it isn't the former, because $vec{f}(P)$ should be the same regardless of which side you're taking the product with. Is it the latter?






vector-analysis







share|cite|improve this question









$endgroup$




Cracking open the texts for the first time in a while, I'm prepping for school with a review of vector calc. Question 1 asks to derive the expressions for divergence for cartesian, cylindrical and spherical coordinates, based on the equation



$$nablacdotvec{f} = lim_{Delta V rightarrow 0} frac{1}{Delta V} left[ iint vec{f}cdot dvec{s} right]$$



(Also refreshing myself on latex, ooint seems to not be a thing in SE?)



So for a given point $P$, and the vector $vec{f}(P)$ at that specific point, I calculate the dot product between that vector and the outward facing surface area over the infinitesimal volume surrounding $P$.



The problem is, if I'm looking at both sides of that little $dV$, wrt each axis, the products should cancel out exactly. So for the surfaces normal to the x-axis, we get



$$f_x(P)hat{i} cdot dydzhat{i} + f_x(P)hat{i} cdot dydz left(hat{-i}right) = 0$$



I figure the most likely issues are that I either have something like a sign error, or that integrating $vec{f}cdot dvec{s}$ should yield zero, and I'm not doing the calculus that I should be doing. I think it isn't the former, because $vec{f}(P)$ should be the same regardless of which side you're taking the product with. Is it the latter?






vector-analysis




vector-analysis






share|cite|improve this question













share|cite|improve this question











share|cite|improve this question




share|cite|improve this question










asked Jan 24 at 2:42









Frank HarrisFrank Harris

62




62












  • $begingroup$
    The code is oiint, but I can't get that one to work, either (though I could swear I've seen it before).
    $endgroup$
    – Paul Sinclair
    Jan 24 at 13:09


















  • $begingroup$
    The code is oiint, but I can't get that one to work, either (though I could swear I've seen it before).
    $endgroup$
    – Paul Sinclair
    Jan 24 at 13:09
















$begingroup$
The code is oiint, but I can't get that one to work, either (though I could swear I've seen it before).
$endgroup$
– Paul Sinclair
Jan 24 at 13:09




$begingroup$
The code is oiint, but I can't get that one to work, either (though I could swear I've seen it before).
$endgroup$
– Paul Sinclair
Jan 24 at 13:09










1 Answer
1






active

oldest

votes


















0












$begingroup$

Your problem is that you are treating $vec f$ as constant over this volume, and the divergence of a constant vector field is $0$.



If the vector field is treated as the velocity of some flow, then the divergence at a point is the rate at which the flow comes out of the point (negative when the flow is into the point). If a "fluid" is emerging from a point, then you would expect that on opposite sides of a small volume around the point that the flow would be in opposite directions on opposite sides. This doesn't have to violate continuity, as the vector field of this outward flow can be $0$ at the point itself. And if you add in a large locally constant flow past the point, the full vector field is not required to be $0$, either. But the divergence of the constant flow is $0$, so the divergence only picks up the contribution of the emerging fluid.



So instead of treating $vec f$ as the same everywhere, break it up into its even and odd components about $P$: $$vec f_e(vec v) = frac 12(vec f(P+vec v)) + vec f(P -vec v)\vec f_o(vec v) = frac 12(vec f(P+vec v) - vec f(P -vec v))$$



While $vec f(Q) = vec f_e(Q - P) + vec f_o(Q - P)$, you will find that the integration for $vec f_e$ is indeed $0$, but for $vec f_o$, the vector field has opposite signs in each direction, so it does not cancel out.






share|cite|improve this answer









$endgroup$













    Your Answer





    StackExchange.ifUsing("editor", function () {
    return StackExchange.using("mathjaxEditing", function () {
    StackExchange.MarkdownEditor.creationCallbacks.add(function (editor, postfix) {
    StackExchange.mathjaxEditing.prepareWmdForMathJax(editor, postfix, [["$", "$"], ["\\(","\\)"]]);
    });
    });
    }, "mathjax-editing");

    StackExchange.ready(function() {
    var channelOptions = {
    tags: "".split(" "),
    id: "69"
    };
    initTagRenderer("".split(" "), "".split(" "), channelOptions);

    StackExchange.using("externalEditor", function() {
    // Have to fire editor after snippets, if snippets enabled
    if (StackExchange.settings.snippets.snippetsEnabled) {
    StackExchange.using("snippets", function() {
    createEditor();
    });
    }
    else {
    createEditor();
    }
    });

    function createEditor() {
    StackExchange.prepareEditor({
    heartbeatType: 'answer',
    autoActivateHeartbeat: false,
    convertImagesToLinks: true,
    noModals: true,
    showLowRepImageUploadWarning: true,
    reputationToPostImages: 10,
    bindNavPrevention: true,
    postfix: "",
    imageUploader: {
    brandingHtml: "Powered by u003ca class="icon-imgur-white" href="https://imgur.com/"u003eu003c/au003e",
    contentPolicyHtml: "User contributions licensed under u003ca href="https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-sa/3.0/"u003ecc by-sa 3.0 with attribution requiredu003c/au003e u003ca href="https://stackoverflow.com/legal/content-policy"u003e(content policy)u003c/au003e",
    allowUrls: true
    },
    noCode: true, onDemand: true,
    discardSelector: ".discard-answer"
    ,immediatelyShowMarkdownHelp:true
    });


    }
    });














    draft saved

    draft discarded


















    StackExchange.ready(
    function () {
    StackExchange.openid.initPostLogin('.new-post-login', 'https%3a%2f%2fmath.stackexchange.com%2fquestions%2f3085381%2fsurface-integral-of-an-infinitesimal-volume-0%23new-answer', 'question_page');
    }
    );

    Post as a guest















    Required, but never shown

























    1 Answer
    1






    active

    oldest

    votes








    1 Answer
    1






    active

    oldest

    votes









    active

    oldest

    votes






    active

    oldest

    votes









    0












    $begingroup$

    Your problem is that you are treating $vec f$ as constant over this volume, and the divergence of a constant vector field is $0$.



    If the vector field is treated as the velocity of some flow, then the divergence at a point is the rate at which the flow comes out of the point (negative when the flow is into the point). If a "fluid" is emerging from a point, then you would expect that on opposite sides of a small volume around the point that the flow would be in opposite directions on opposite sides. This doesn't have to violate continuity, as the vector field of this outward flow can be $0$ at the point itself. And if you add in a large locally constant flow past the point, the full vector field is not required to be $0$, either. But the divergence of the constant flow is $0$, so the divergence only picks up the contribution of the emerging fluid.



    So instead of treating $vec f$ as the same everywhere, break it up into its even and odd components about $P$: $$vec f_e(vec v) = frac 12(vec f(P+vec v)) + vec f(P -vec v)\vec f_o(vec v) = frac 12(vec f(P+vec v) - vec f(P -vec v))$$



    While $vec f(Q) = vec f_e(Q - P) + vec f_o(Q - P)$, you will find that the integration for $vec f_e$ is indeed $0$, but for $vec f_o$, the vector field has opposite signs in each direction, so it does not cancel out.






    share|cite|improve this answer









    $endgroup$


















      0












      $begingroup$

      Your problem is that you are treating $vec f$ as constant over this volume, and the divergence of a constant vector field is $0$.



      If the vector field is treated as the velocity of some flow, then the divergence at a point is the rate at which the flow comes out of the point (negative when the flow is into the point). If a "fluid" is emerging from a point, then you would expect that on opposite sides of a small volume around the point that the flow would be in opposite directions on opposite sides. This doesn't have to violate continuity, as the vector field of this outward flow can be $0$ at the point itself. And if you add in a large locally constant flow past the point, the full vector field is not required to be $0$, either. But the divergence of the constant flow is $0$, so the divergence only picks up the contribution of the emerging fluid.



      So instead of treating $vec f$ as the same everywhere, break it up into its even and odd components about $P$: $$vec f_e(vec v) = frac 12(vec f(P+vec v)) + vec f(P -vec v)\vec f_o(vec v) = frac 12(vec f(P+vec v) - vec f(P -vec v))$$



      While $vec f(Q) = vec f_e(Q - P) + vec f_o(Q - P)$, you will find that the integration for $vec f_e$ is indeed $0$, but for $vec f_o$, the vector field has opposite signs in each direction, so it does not cancel out.






      share|cite|improve this answer









      $endgroup$
















        0












        0








        0





        $begingroup$

        Your problem is that you are treating $vec f$ as constant over this volume, and the divergence of a constant vector field is $0$.



        If the vector field is treated as the velocity of some flow, then the divergence at a point is the rate at which the flow comes out of the point (negative when the flow is into the point). If a "fluid" is emerging from a point, then you would expect that on opposite sides of a small volume around the point that the flow would be in opposite directions on opposite sides. This doesn't have to violate continuity, as the vector field of this outward flow can be $0$ at the point itself. And if you add in a large locally constant flow past the point, the full vector field is not required to be $0$, either. But the divergence of the constant flow is $0$, so the divergence only picks up the contribution of the emerging fluid.



        So instead of treating $vec f$ as the same everywhere, break it up into its even and odd components about $P$: $$vec f_e(vec v) = frac 12(vec f(P+vec v)) + vec f(P -vec v)\vec f_o(vec v) = frac 12(vec f(P+vec v) - vec f(P -vec v))$$



        While $vec f(Q) = vec f_e(Q - P) + vec f_o(Q - P)$, you will find that the integration for $vec f_e$ is indeed $0$, but for $vec f_o$, the vector field has opposite signs in each direction, so it does not cancel out.






        share|cite|improve this answer









        $endgroup$



        Your problem is that you are treating $vec f$ as constant over this volume, and the divergence of a constant vector field is $0$.



        If the vector field is treated as the velocity of some flow, then the divergence at a point is the rate at which the flow comes out of the point (negative when the flow is into the point). If a "fluid" is emerging from a point, then you would expect that on opposite sides of a small volume around the point that the flow would be in opposite directions on opposite sides. This doesn't have to violate continuity, as the vector field of this outward flow can be $0$ at the point itself. And if you add in a large locally constant flow past the point, the full vector field is not required to be $0$, either. But the divergence of the constant flow is $0$, so the divergence only picks up the contribution of the emerging fluid.



        So instead of treating $vec f$ as the same everywhere, break it up into its even and odd components about $P$: $$vec f_e(vec v) = frac 12(vec f(P+vec v)) + vec f(P -vec v)\vec f_o(vec v) = frac 12(vec f(P+vec v) - vec f(P -vec v))$$



        While $vec f(Q) = vec f_e(Q - P) + vec f_o(Q - P)$, you will find that the integration for $vec f_e$ is indeed $0$, but for $vec f_o$, the vector field has opposite signs in each direction, so it does not cancel out.







        share|cite|improve this answer












        share|cite|improve this answer



        share|cite|improve this answer










        answered Jan 24 at 13:32









        Paul SinclairPaul Sinclair

        20.4k21443




        20.4k21443






























            draft saved

            draft discarded




















































            Thanks for contributing an answer to Mathematics Stack Exchange!


            • Please be sure to answer the question. Provide details and share your research!

            But avoid …



            • Asking for help, clarification, or responding to other answers.

            • Making statements based on opinion; back them up with references or personal experience.


            Use MathJax to format equations. MathJax reference.


            To learn more, see our tips on writing great answers.




            draft saved


            draft discarded














            StackExchange.ready(
            function () {
            StackExchange.openid.initPostLogin('.new-post-login', 'https%3a%2f%2fmath.stackexchange.com%2fquestions%2f3085381%2fsurface-integral-of-an-infinitesimal-volume-0%23new-answer', 'question_page');
            }
            );

            Post as a guest















            Required, but never shown





















































            Required, but never shown














            Required, but never shown












            Required, but never shown







            Required, but never shown

































            Required, but never shown














            Required, but never shown












            Required, but never shown







            Required, but never shown







            -

            Popular posts from this blog

            Mario Kart Wii

            Image
            Please consider supporting The Cutting Room Floor on Patreon. Thanks for all your support! Mario Kart Wii From The Cutting Room Floor Jump to: navigation, search Mario Kart Wii Developer : Nintendo Publisher : Nintendo Platform : Wii Released in JP : April 10, 2008 Released in US : April 27, 2008 Released in EU : April 11, 2008 Released in AU : April 24, 2008 Released in KR : April 30, 2009 This game has unused animations. This game has unused areas. This game has unused code. This game has unused objects. This game has unused modes / minigames. This game has unused graphics. This game has unused models. This game has unused items. This game has unused music. This game has regional differences. This game has a notes page This game has a prerelease article Mario Kart Wii is the sixth game in the series (not counting Arcade editions), which intro...
            Read more

            The Binding of Isaac: Rebirth/Afterbirth

            Image
            Please consider supporting The Cutting Room Floor on Patreon. Thanks for all your support! The Binding of Isaac: Rebirth/Afterbirth From The Cutting Room Floor < The Binding of Isaac: Rebirth Jump to: navigation, search This is a sub-page of The Binding of Isaac: Rebirth . Afterbirth is the first expansion pack for Rebirth and features a variety of improvements. Contents 1 Unused Graphics 1.1 Old Man Keeper 1.2 Skinless Hush 1.3 Miscellaneous Unused Hush Sprites 1.4 Generosity achievement 1.5 Afterbirth+ Room Editor 1.6 Bearded Ultra Greed 1.7 Early Ultra Greed 1.8 Unused Brownie Expression 1.9 Frail's Spinning Head 1.10 Mom's Dead Hand Alt 2 Unused Audio 2.1 Unused Dead Womb Layer 2.2 Unused Hush Battle Outro 2.3 The Stain Grunt Unused Graphics Old Man Keeper Image file: gfxuimain me...
            Read more

            What does “Dominus providebit” mean?

            Image
            5 Does "Dominus providebit" mean "The Lord will provide" or "The Lord provides"? I once had a bit of an argument with a guy who studied Latin over that. It's an inscription that appears on the rim of some old Swiss coins that I have. meaning latin-to-english-translation grammar-identification share | improve this question edited Jan 18 at 15:27 V2Blast 105 4 asked Jan 17 at 22:49 Donald K. Donald K. 26 1 ...
            Read more