Calculate $int_CPdx+Qdy$ where $P(x,y)=xe^{-y^2}$ and $Q(x,y)=-x^2ye^{-y^2}+frac{1}{x^2+y^2+1}$, $C$ is the...











up vote
0
down vote

favorite
1












Calculate $int_CPdx+Qdy$ where $P(x,y)=xe^{-y^2}$ and $Q(x,y)=-x^2ye^{-y^2}+frac{1}{x^2+y^2+1}$, $C$ is the boundary of the square determined by the inequalities $-aleq xleq a$, $-aleq yleq a$, oriented positively.



I have thought to do the following:



Using Green's theorem we get to that



$int_CPdx+Qdy=intint_D(frac{partial Q}{partial x}-frac{partial P}{partial y})dA=
intint_D(-2xye^{-y^2}-frac{2x}{(x^2+y^2+1)^2}+2xye^{-y^2})dA=intint_D-frac{2x}{(x^2+y^2+1)^2}dA=int_{-a}^{a}int_{-a}^{a}-frac{2x}{(x^2+y^2+1)^2}dxdy=-int_{-a}^{a}int_{a^2+y^2+1}^{a^2+y^2+1}u^{-2}dudy=-int_{-a}^{a}0dy=0$



Is this fine? Thank you.










share|cite|improve this question




















  • 1




    How did you calculate $dfrac{partial Q}{partial x}$?
    – Umberto P.
    Nov 16 at 17:37






  • 1




    You seem to be missing a term.
    – Doug M
    Nov 16 at 17:39










  • @UmbertoP. Yes, I had an error in that but I already corrected it and I got to where I show in the question, what else can I do? Use polar coordinates?
    – Nash
    Nov 16 at 17:41















up vote
0
down vote

favorite
1












Calculate $int_CPdx+Qdy$ where $P(x,y)=xe^{-y^2}$ and $Q(x,y)=-x^2ye^{-y^2}+frac{1}{x^2+y^2+1}$, $C$ is the boundary of the square determined by the inequalities $-aleq xleq a$, $-aleq yleq a$, oriented positively.



I have thought to do the following:



Using Green's theorem we get to that



$int_CPdx+Qdy=intint_D(frac{partial Q}{partial x}-frac{partial P}{partial y})dA=
intint_D(-2xye^{-y^2}-frac{2x}{(x^2+y^2+1)^2}+2xye^{-y^2})dA=intint_D-frac{2x}{(x^2+y^2+1)^2}dA=int_{-a}^{a}int_{-a}^{a}-frac{2x}{(x^2+y^2+1)^2}dxdy=-int_{-a}^{a}int_{a^2+y^2+1}^{a^2+y^2+1}u^{-2}dudy=-int_{-a}^{a}0dy=0$



Is this fine? Thank you.










share|cite|improve this question




















  • 1




    How did you calculate $dfrac{partial Q}{partial x}$?
    – Umberto P.
    Nov 16 at 17:37






  • 1




    You seem to be missing a term.
    – Doug M
    Nov 16 at 17:39










  • @UmbertoP. Yes, I had an error in that but I already corrected it and I got to where I show in the question, what else can I do? Use polar coordinates?
    – Nash
    Nov 16 at 17:41













up vote
0
down vote

favorite
1









up vote
0
down vote

favorite
1






1





Calculate $int_CPdx+Qdy$ where $P(x,y)=xe^{-y^2}$ and $Q(x,y)=-x^2ye^{-y^2}+frac{1}{x^2+y^2+1}$, $C$ is the boundary of the square determined by the inequalities $-aleq xleq a$, $-aleq yleq a$, oriented positively.



I have thought to do the following:



Using Green's theorem we get to that



$int_CPdx+Qdy=intint_D(frac{partial Q}{partial x}-frac{partial P}{partial y})dA=
intint_D(-2xye^{-y^2}-frac{2x}{(x^2+y^2+1)^2}+2xye^{-y^2})dA=intint_D-frac{2x}{(x^2+y^2+1)^2}dA=int_{-a}^{a}int_{-a}^{a}-frac{2x}{(x^2+y^2+1)^2}dxdy=-int_{-a}^{a}int_{a^2+y^2+1}^{a^2+y^2+1}u^{-2}dudy=-int_{-a}^{a}0dy=0$



Is this fine? Thank you.










share|cite|improve this question















Calculate $int_CPdx+Qdy$ where $P(x,y)=xe^{-y^2}$ and $Q(x,y)=-x^2ye^{-y^2}+frac{1}{x^2+y^2+1}$, $C$ is the boundary of the square determined by the inequalities $-aleq xleq a$, $-aleq yleq a$, oriented positively.



I have thought to do the following:



Using Green's theorem we get to that



$int_CPdx+Qdy=intint_D(frac{partial Q}{partial x}-frac{partial P}{partial y})dA=
intint_D(-2xye^{-y^2}-frac{2x}{(x^2+y^2+1)^2}+2xye^{-y^2})dA=intint_D-frac{2x}{(x^2+y^2+1)^2}dA=int_{-a}^{a}int_{-a}^{a}-frac{2x}{(x^2+y^2+1)^2}dxdy=-int_{-a}^{a}int_{a^2+y^2+1}^{a^2+y^2+1}u^{-2}dudy=-int_{-a}^{a}0dy=0$



Is this fine? Thank you.







calculus integration multivariable-calculus greens-theorem






share|cite|improve this question















share|cite|improve this question













share|cite|improve this question




share|cite|improve this question








edited Nov 16 at 17:51

























asked Nov 16 at 17:33









Nash

47049




47049








  • 1




    How did you calculate $dfrac{partial Q}{partial x}$?
    – Umberto P.
    Nov 16 at 17:37






  • 1




    You seem to be missing a term.
    – Doug M
    Nov 16 at 17:39










  • @UmbertoP. Yes, I had an error in that but I already corrected it and I got to where I show in the question, what else can I do? Use polar coordinates?
    – Nash
    Nov 16 at 17:41














  • 1




    How did you calculate $dfrac{partial Q}{partial x}$?
    – Umberto P.
    Nov 16 at 17:37






  • 1




    You seem to be missing a term.
    – Doug M
    Nov 16 at 17:39










  • @UmbertoP. Yes, I had an error in that but I already corrected it and I got to where I show in the question, what else can I do? Use polar coordinates?
    – Nash
    Nov 16 at 17:41








1




1




How did you calculate $dfrac{partial Q}{partial x}$?
– Umberto P.
Nov 16 at 17:37




How did you calculate $dfrac{partial Q}{partial x}$?
– Umberto P.
Nov 16 at 17:37




1




1




You seem to be missing a term.
– Doug M
Nov 16 at 17:39




You seem to be missing a term.
– Doug M
Nov 16 at 17:39












@UmbertoP. Yes, I had an error in that but I already corrected it and I got to where I show in the question, what else can I do? Use polar coordinates?
– Nash
Nov 16 at 17:41




@UmbertoP. Yes, I had an error in that but I already corrected it and I got to where I show in the question, what else can I do? Use polar coordinates?
– Nash
Nov 16 at 17:41










2 Answers
2






active

oldest

votes

















up vote
1
down vote



accepted










Since your region $D$ is symmetric about the $x$-axis, any integrable function $f$ satisfying $f(x,y) = -f(-x,y)$ will satisfy $$int_D f(x,y) , dA = 0$$ by symmetry.






share|cite|improve this answer





















  • Excellent answer, could you see if what I did in the question is right? Thank you.
    – Nash
    Nov 16 at 17:52


















up vote
1
down vote













Something you might want to consider....



$G(x,y) = (xe^{-y^2}, -x^2 e^{-y^2})$ is a conservative field.



i.e. $(xe^{-y^2}, -x^2 e^{-y^2}) = nabla (frac12 x^2 e^{-y^2})$ and $nabla times (xe^{-y^2}, -x^2 e^{-y^2}) = 0$



But, you are not obligated to use Greens theorem / stokes therm. You can just strip out the conservative portion of your field.



$F(x,y) = G(x,y) + (0, frac {1}{x^2+y^2 + 1})$



$oint F(x,y)cdot dr = oint G(x,y) cdot dr + oint(0, frac {1}{x^2+y^2 + 1})cdot dr$



$oint G(x,y) cdot dr = 0$ because it is a conservative field.



Leaving:



$oint(0, frac {1}{x^2+y^2 + 1})cdot dr$



It is up to you whether you think it is easier to integrate this or



$iint frac {-2x}{(x^2+y^2 + 1)^2} dA$



They will be equal.



If you chose to stick with the contour integral, the the impact of horizontal movement around the contour is zero.



And since the square is centered at the origin, we go up one side of the square, and down the other and get two identical integrals, in opposite directions, that cancel each other out.






share|cite|improve this answer





















    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',
    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%2f3001415%2fcalculate-int-cpdxqdy-where-px-y-xe-y2-and-qx-y-x2ye-y2-fr%23new-answer', 'question_page');
    }
    );

    Post as a guest















    Required, but never shown

























    2 Answers
    2






    active

    oldest

    votes








    2 Answers
    2






    active

    oldest

    votes









    active

    oldest

    votes






    active

    oldest

    votes








    up vote
    1
    down vote



    accepted










    Since your region $D$ is symmetric about the $x$-axis, any integrable function $f$ satisfying $f(x,y) = -f(-x,y)$ will satisfy $$int_D f(x,y) , dA = 0$$ by symmetry.






    share|cite|improve this answer





















    • Excellent answer, could you see if what I did in the question is right? Thank you.
      – Nash
      Nov 16 at 17:52















    up vote
    1
    down vote



    accepted










    Since your region $D$ is symmetric about the $x$-axis, any integrable function $f$ satisfying $f(x,y) = -f(-x,y)$ will satisfy $$int_D f(x,y) , dA = 0$$ by symmetry.






    share|cite|improve this answer





















    • Excellent answer, could you see if what I did in the question is right? Thank you.
      – Nash
      Nov 16 at 17:52













    up vote
    1
    down vote



    accepted







    up vote
    1
    down vote



    accepted






    Since your region $D$ is symmetric about the $x$-axis, any integrable function $f$ satisfying $f(x,y) = -f(-x,y)$ will satisfy $$int_D f(x,y) , dA = 0$$ by symmetry.






    share|cite|improve this answer












    Since your region $D$ is symmetric about the $x$-axis, any integrable function $f$ satisfying $f(x,y) = -f(-x,y)$ will satisfy $$int_D f(x,y) , dA = 0$$ by symmetry.







    share|cite|improve this answer












    share|cite|improve this answer



    share|cite|improve this answer










    answered Nov 16 at 17:43









    Umberto P.

    38.2k13063




    38.2k13063












    • Excellent answer, could you see if what I did in the question is right? Thank you.
      – Nash
      Nov 16 at 17:52


















    • Excellent answer, could you see if what I did in the question is right? Thank you.
      – Nash
      Nov 16 at 17:52
















    Excellent answer, could you see if what I did in the question is right? Thank you.
    – Nash
    Nov 16 at 17:52




    Excellent answer, could you see if what I did in the question is right? Thank you.
    – Nash
    Nov 16 at 17:52










    up vote
    1
    down vote













    Something you might want to consider....



    $G(x,y) = (xe^{-y^2}, -x^2 e^{-y^2})$ is a conservative field.



    i.e. $(xe^{-y^2}, -x^2 e^{-y^2}) = nabla (frac12 x^2 e^{-y^2})$ and $nabla times (xe^{-y^2}, -x^2 e^{-y^2}) = 0$



    But, you are not obligated to use Greens theorem / stokes therm. You can just strip out the conservative portion of your field.



    $F(x,y) = G(x,y) + (0, frac {1}{x^2+y^2 + 1})$



    $oint F(x,y)cdot dr = oint G(x,y) cdot dr + oint(0, frac {1}{x^2+y^2 + 1})cdot dr$



    $oint G(x,y) cdot dr = 0$ because it is a conservative field.



    Leaving:



    $oint(0, frac {1}{x^2+y^2 + 1})cdot dr$



    It is up to you whether you think it is easier to integrate this or



    $iint frac {-2x}{(x^2+y^2 + 1)^2} dA$



    They will be equal.



    If you chose to stick with the contour integral, the the impact of horizontal movement around the contour is zero.



    And since the square is centered at the origin, we go up one side of the square, and down the other and get two identical integrals, in opposite directions, that cancel each other out.






    share|cite|improve this answer

























      up vote
      1
      down vote













      Something you might want to consider....



      $G(x,y) = (xe^{-y^2}, -x^2 e^{-y^2})$ is a conservative field.



      i.e. $(xe^{-y^2}, -x^2 e^{-y^2}) = nabla (frac12 x^2 e^{-y^2})$ and $nabla times (xe^{-y^2}, -x^2 e^{-y^2}) = 0$



      But, you are not obligated to use Greens theorem / stokes therm. You can just strip out the conservative portion of your field.



      $F(x,y) = G(x,y) + (0, frac {1}{x^2+y^2 + 1})$



      $oint F(x,y)cdot dr = oint G(x,y) cdot dr + oint(0, frac {1}{x^2+y^2 + 1})cdot dr$



      $oint G(x,y) cdot dr = 0$ because it is a conservative field.



      Leaving:



      $oint(0, frac {1}{x^2+y^2 + 1})cdot dr$



      It is up to you whether you think it is easier to integrate this or



      $iint frac {-2x}{(x^2+y^2 + 1)^2} dA$



      They will be equal.



      If you chose to stick with the contour integral, the the impact of horizontal movement around the contour is zero.



      And since the square is centered at the origin, we go up one side of the square, and down the other and get two identical integrals, in opposite directions, that cancel each other out.






      share|cite|improve this answer























        up vote
        1
        down vote










        up vote
        1
        down vote









        Something you might want to consider....



        $G(x,y) = (xe^{-y^2}, -x^2 e^{-y^2})$ is a conservative field.



        i.e. $(xe^{-y^2}, -x^2 e^{-y^2}) = nabla (frac12 x^2 e^{-y^2})$ and $nabla times (xe^{-y^2}, -x^2 e^{-y^2}) = 0$



        But, you are not obligated to use Greens theorem / stokes therm. You can just strip out the conservative portion of your field.



        $F(x,y) = G(x,y) + (0, frac {1}{x^2+y^2 + 1})$



        $oint F(x,y)cdot dr = oint G(x,y) cdot dr + oint(0, frac {1}{x^2+y^2 + 1})cdot dr$



        $oint G(x,y) cdot dr = 0$ because it is a conservative field.



        Leaving:



        $oint(0, frac {1}{x^2+y^2 + 1})cdot dr$



        It is up to you whether you think it is easier to integrate this or



        $iint frac {-2x}{(x^2+y^2 + 1)^2} dA$



        They will be equal.



        If you chose to stick with the contour integral, the the impact of horizontal movement around the contour is zero.



        And since the square is centered at the origin, we go up one side of the square, and down the other and get two identical integrals, in opposite directions, that cancel each other out.






        share|cite|improve this answer












        Something you might want to consider....



        $G(x,y) = (xe^{-y^2}, -x^2 e^{-y^2})$ is a conservative field.



        i.e. $(xe^{-y^2}, -x^2 e^{-y^2}) = nabla (frac12 x^2 e^{-y^2})$ and $nabla times (xe^{-y^2}, -x^2 e^{-y^2}) = 0$



        But, you are not obligated to use Greens theorem / stokes therm. You can just strip out the conservative portion of your field.



        $F(x,y) = G(x,y) + (0, frac {1}{x^2+y^2 + 1})$



        $oint F(x,y)cdot dr = oint G(x,y) cdot dr + oint(0, frac {1}{x^2+y^2 + 1})cdot dr$



        $oint G(x,y) cdot dr = 0$ because it is a conservative field.



        Leaving:



        $oint(0, frac {1}{x^2+y^2 + 1})cdot dr$



        It is up to you whether you think it is easier to integrate this or



        $iint frac {-2x}{(x^2+y^2 + 1)^2} dA$



        They will be equal.



        If you chose to stick with the contour integral, the the impact of horizontal movement around the contour is zero.



        And since the square is centered at the origin, we go up one side of the square, and down the other and get two identical integrals, in opposite directions, that cancel each other out.







        share|cite|improve this answer












        share|cite|improve this answer



        share|cite|improve this answer










        answered Nov 16 at 23:29









        Doug M

        43k31753




        43k31753






























            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.





            Some of your past answers have not been well-received, and you're in danger of being blocked from answering.


            Please pay close attention to the following guidance:


            • 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.


            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%2f3001415%2fcalculate-int-cpdxqdy-where-px-y-xe-y2-and-qx-y-x2ye-y2-fr%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

            Biblatex bibliography style without URLs when DOI exists (in Overleaf with Zotero bibliography)

            ComboBox Display Member on multiple fields

            Is it possible to collect Nectar points via Trainline?