The following content is
provided under a Creative
Commons license.
Your support will help MIT
OpenCourseWare continue to offer
high quality educational
resources for free.
To make a donation or to view
additional materials from
hundreds of MIT courses,
visit MIT OpenCourseWare at
ocw.mit.edu.
And, well let's see.
So, before we actually start
reviewing for the test,
I still have to tell you a few
small things because I promised
to say a few words about what's
the difference,
or precisely,
what's the difference between
curl being zero and a field
being a gradient field,
and why we have this assumption
that our vector field had to be
defined everywhere for a field
with curl zero to actually be
conservative for our test for
gradient fields to be valid?
So -- More about validity of
Green's theorem and things like
that.
So, we've seen the statement of
Green's theorem in two forms.
Both of them have to do with
comparing a line integral along
a closed curve to a double
integral over the region inside
enclosed by the curve.
So,
one of them says the line
integral for the work done by a
vector field along a closed
curve counterclockwise is equal
to the double integral of a curl
of a field over the enclosed
region.
And, the other one says the
total flux out of the region,
so, the flux through the curve
is equal to the double integral
of divergence of a field in the
region.
So, in both cases,
we need the vector field to be
defined not only,
I mean, the left hand side
makes sense if a vector field is
just defined on the curve
because it's just a line
integral on C.
We don't care what happens
inside.
But, for the right-hand side to
make sense,
and therefore for the equality
to make sense,
we need the vector field to be
defined everywhere inside the
region.
So, I said, if there is a point
somewhere in here where my
vector field is not defined,
then it doesn't work.
And actually,
we've seen that example.
So, this only works if F and
its derivatives are defined
everywhere in the region,
R.
Otherwise, we are in trouble.
OK,
so we've seen for example that
if I gave you the vector field
minus yi xj over x squared plus
y squared,
so that's the same vector field
that was on that problem set a
couple of weeks ago.
Then, well, f is not defined at
the origin, but it's defined
everywhere else.
And, wherever it's defined,
it's curl is zero.
I should say everywhere it's --
And so, if we have a closed
curve in the plane,
well, there's two situations.
One is if it does not enclose
the origin.
Then,
yes,
we can apply Green's theorem
and it will tell us that it's
equal to the double integral in
here of curl F dA,
which will be zero because this
is zero.
However,
if I have a curve that encloses
the origin,
let's say like this,
for example,
then,
well, I cannot use the same
method because the vector field
and its curl are not defined at
the origin.
And, in fact,
you know that ignoring the
problem and saying,
well, the curl is still zero
everywhere,
will give you the wrong answer
because we've seen an example.
We've seen that along the unit
circle the total work is 2 pi
not zero.
So, we can't use Green.
However, we can't use it
directly.
So, there is an extended
version of Green's theorem that
tells you the following thing.
Well,
it tells me that even though I
can't do things for just this
region enclosed by C prime,
I can still do things for the
region in between two different
curves.
OK, so let me show you what I
have in mind.
So, let's say that I have my
curve C'.
Where's my yellow chalk?
Oh, here.
So, I have this curve C'.
I can't apply Green's theorem
inside it, but let's get out the
smaller thing.
So, that one I'm going to make
going clockwise.
You will see why.
Then, I could say,
well, let me change my mind.
This picture is not very well
prepared.
That's because my writer is on
strike.
OK, so let's say we have C' and
C'' both going counterclockwise.
Then,
I claim that Green's theorem
still applies,
and tells me that the line
integral along C prime minus the
line integral along C double
prime is equal to the double
integral over the region in
between.
So here, now,
it's this region with the hole
of the curve.
And, well, in our case,
that will turn out to be zero
because curl is zero.
OK, so this doesn't tell us
what each of these two line
integrals is.
But actually,
it tells us that they are equal
to each other.
And so, by computing one,
you can see actually that for
this vector field,
if you take any curve that goes
counterclockwise around the
origin,
you would get two pi no matter
what the curve is.
So how do you get to this?
Why is this not like
conceptually a new theorem?
Well, just think of the
following thing.
I'm not going to do it on top
of that because it's going to be
messy if I draw too many things.
But, so here I have my C''.
Here, I have C'.
Let me actually make a slit
that will connect them to each
other like this.
So now if I take,
see,
I can form a single closed
curve that will enclose all of
this region with kind of an
infinitely thin slit here
counterclockwise.
And so, if I go
counterclockwise around this
region, basically I go
counterclockwise along the outer
curve.
Then I go along the slit.
Then I go clockwise along the
inside curve,
then back along the slit.
And then I'm done.
So,
if I take the line integral
along this big curve consisting
of all these pieces,
now I can apply Green's theorem
to that because it is the usual
counterclockwise curve that goes
around a region where my field
is well-defined.
See, I've eliminated the origin
from the picture.
And, so the total line integral
for this thing is equal to the
integral along C prime,
I guess the outer one.
Then, I also need to have what
I do along the inner side.
And, the inner side is going to
be C double prime,
but going backwards because now
I'm going clockwise on C prime
so that I'm going
counterclockwise around the
shaded region.
Well, of course there will be
contributions from the line
integral along this wide
segment.
But, I do it twice,
once each way.
So, they cancel out.
So, the white segments cancel
out.
You probably shouldn't,
in your notes,
write down white segments
because probably they are not
white on your paper.
But, hopefully you get the
meaning of what I'm trying to
say.
OK, so basically that tells
you, you can still play tricks
with Green's theorem when the
region has holes in it.
You just had to be careful and
somehow subtract some other
curve so that together things
will work out.
There is a similar thing with
the divergence theorem,
of course, with flux and double
integral of div f,
you can apply exactly the same
argument.
OK, so basically you can apply
Green's theorem for a region
that has several boundary
curves.
You just have to be careful
that the outer boundary must go
counterclockwise.
The inner boundary either goes
clockwise, or you put a minus
sign.
OK,
and the last cultural note,
so, the definition,
we say that a region in the
plane,
sorry, I should say a connected
region in the plane,
so that means -- So,
connected means it consists of
a single piece.
OK, so, connected,
there is a single piece.
These two guys together are not
connected.
But, if I join them,
then this is a connected
region.
We say it's simply connected --
-- if any closed curve in it,
OK,
so I need to gave a name to my
region,
let's say R,
any closed curve in R,
bounds,
no,
sorry.
If the interior of any closed
curve in R -- -- is also
contained in R.
So, concretely,
what does that mean?
That means the region,
R, does not have any holes
inside it.
Maybe I should draw two
pictures to explain what I mean.
So,
this guy here is simply
connected while -- -- this guy
here is not simply connected
because if I take this curve,
that's a curve inside my region.
But, the piece that it bounds
is not actually entirely
contained in my origin.
And, so why is that relevant?
Well,
if you know that your vector
field is defined everywhere in a
simply connected region,
then you don't have to worry
about this question of,
can I apply Green's theorem to
the inside?
You know it's automatically OK
because if you have a closed
curve,
then the vector field is,
I mean, if a vector field is
defined on the curve it will
also be defined inside.
OK,
so if the domain of definition
-- -- of a vector field is
defined and differentiable -- --
is simply connected -- -- then
we can always apply -- --
Green's theorem -- -- and,
of course,
provided that we do it on a
curve where the vector field is
defined.
I mean, your line integral
doesn't make sense so there's
nothing to compute.
But, if you have,
so, again, the argument would
be, well, if a vector field is
defined on the curve,
it's also defined inside.
So,
see,
the problem with that vector
field here is precisely that its
domain of definition is not
simply connected because there
is a hole,
namely the origin.
OK, so for this guy,
domain of definition,
which is plane minus the origin
with the origin removed is not
simply connected.
And so that's why you have this
line integral that makes perfect
sense, but you can't apply
Green's theorem to it.
So now, what does that mean a
particular?
Well, we've seen this criterion
that if a curl of the vector
field is zero and it's defined
in the entire plane,
then the vector field is
conservative,
and it's a gradient field.
And, the argument to prove that
is basically to use Green's
theorem.
So, in fact,
the actual optimal statement
you can make is if a vector
field is defined in a simply
connected region,
and its curl is zero,
then it's a gradient field.
So, let me just write that down.
So, the correct statement,
I mean, the previous one we've
seen is also correct.
But this one is somehow better
and closer to what exactly is
needed if curl F is zero and the
domain of definition where F is
defined is simply connected --
-- then F is conservative.
And that means also it's a
gradient field.
It's the same thing.
OK, any questions on this?
No?
OK, some good news.
What I've just said here won't
come up on the test on Thursday.
OK.
(APPLAUSE) Still,
it's stuff that you should be
aware of generally speaking
because it will be useful,
say, on the next week's problem
set.
And,
maybe on the final it would be,
there won't be any really,
really complicated things
probably,
but you might need to be at
least vaguely aware of this
issue of things being simply
connected.
And by the way,
I mean, this is also somehow
the starting point of topology,
which is the branch of math
that studies the shapes of
regions.
So,
in particular,
you can try to distinguish
domains in the plains by looking
at whether they're simply
connected or not,
and what kinds of features they
have in terms of how you can
joint point what kinds of curves
exist in them.
And, since that's the branch of
math in which I work,
I thought I should tell you a
bit about it.
OK, so now back to reviewing
for the exam.
So, I'm going to basically list
topics.
And, if time permits,
I will say a few things about
problems from practice exam 3B.
I'm hoping that you have it or
your neighbor has it,
or you can somehow get it.
Anyway, given time,
I'm not sure how much I will
say about the problems in and of
themselves.
OK, so the main thing to know
about this exam is how to set up
and evaluate double integrals
and line integrals.
OK, if you know how to do these
two things, then you are in much
better shape than if you don't.
And -- So, the first thing
we've seen, just to write it
down, there's two main objects.
And, it's kind of important to
not confuse them with each
other.
OK, there's double integrals of
our regions of some quantity,
dA,
and the other one is the line
integral along a curve of a
vector field,
F.dr or F.Mds depending on
whether it's work or flux that
we are trying to do.
And, so we should know how to
set up these things and how to
evaluate them.
And, roughly speaking,
in this one you start by
drawing a picture of the region,
then deciding which way you
will integrate it.
It could be dx dy,
dy dx,
r dr d theta,
and then you will set up the
bound carefully by slicing it
and studying how the bounds for
the inner variable depend on the
outer variable.
So, the first topic will be
setting up double integrals.
And so, remember,
OK, so maybe I should make this
more explicit.
We want to draw a picture of R
and take slices in the chosen
way so that we get an iterated
integral.
OK, so let's do just a quick
example.
So, if I look at problem one on
the exam 3B,
it says to look at the line
integral from zero to one,
line integral from x to 2x of
possibly something,
but dy dx.
And it says,
let's look at how we would set
this up the other way around by
exchanging x and y.
So, we should get to something
that will be the same integral
dx dy.
I mean, if you have a function
of x and y, then it will be the
same function.
But, of course,
the bounds change.
So, how do we exchange the
order of integration?
Well, the only way to do it
consistently is to draw a
picture.
So, let's see,
what does this mean?
Here, it means we integrate
from y equals x to y equals 2x,
x between zero and one.
So, we should draw a picture.
The lower bound for y is y
equals x.
So, let's draw y equals x.
That seems to be here.
And, we'll go up to y equals
2x, which is a line also but
with bigger slope.
And then, all right,
so for each value of x,
my origin will go from x to 2x.
Well, and I do this for all
values of x that go to x equals
one.
So, I stop at x equals one,
which is here.
And then, my region is
something like this.
OK, so this point here,
in case you are wondering,
well, when x equals one,
y is one.
And that point here is one, two.
OK, any questions about that so
far?
OK, so somehow that's the first
kill, when you see an integral,
how to figure out what it
means, how to draw the region.
And then there's a converse
scale which is given the region,
how to set up the integral for
it.
So, if we want to set up
instead dx dy,
then it means we are going to
actually look at the converse
question which is,
for a given value of y,
what is the range of values of
x?
OK, so if we fix y,
well, where do we enter the
region, and where do we leave
it?
So, we seem to enter on this
side, and we seem to leave on
that side.
At least that seems to be true
for the first few values of y
that I choose.
But, hey, if I take a larger
value of y, then I will enter on
the side, and I will leave on
this vertical side,
not on that one.
So, I seem to have two
different things going on.
OK, the place where enter my
region is always y equals 2x,
which is the same as x equals y
over two.
So, x seems to always start at
y over two.
But, where I leave to be either
x equals y, or here,
x equals y.
And, that depends on the value
of y.
So, in fact,
I have to break this into two
different integrals.
I have to treat separately the
case where y is between zero and
one, and between one and two.
So, what I do in that case is I
just make two integrals.
So, I say, both of them start
at y over two.
But, in the first case,
we'll stop at x equals y.
In the second case,
we'll stop at x equals one.
OK, and now,
what are the values of y for
each case?
Well, the first case is when y
is between zero and one.
The second case is when y is
between one and two,
which I guess this picture now
is completely unreadable,
but hopefully you've been
following what's going on,
or else you can see it in the
solutions to the problem.
And, so that's our final answer.
OK, any questions about how to
set up double integrals in xy
coordinates?
No?
OK, who feels comfortable with
this kind of problem?
OK, good.
I'm happy to see the vast
majority.
So, the bad news is we have to
be able to do it not only in xy
coordinates, but also in polar
coordinates.
So, when you go to polar
coordinates, basically all you
have to remember on the side of
integrand is that x becomes r
cosine theta.
Y becomes r sine theta.
And, dx dy becomes r dr d theta.
In terms of how you slice for
your region, well,
you will be integrating first
over r.
So, that means what you're
doing is you're fixing the value
of theta.
And, for that value of theta,
you ask yourself,
for what range of values of r
am I going to be inside my
origin?
So, if my origin looks like
this, then for this value of
theta, r would go from zero to
whatever this distance is.
And of course I have to find
how this distance depends on
theta.
And then, I will find the
extreme values of theta.
Now, of course,
is the origin is really looking
like this, then you're not going
to do it in polar coordinates.
But, if it's like a circle or a
half circle, or things like
that,
then even if a problem doesn't
tell you to do it in polar
coordinates you might want to
seriously consider it.
OK, so I'm not going to do it
but problem two in the practice
exam is a good example of doing
something in polar coordinates.
OK,
so in terms of things that we
do with double integrals,
there's a few formulas that I'd
like you to remember about
applications that we've seen of
double integrals.
So, quantities that we can
compute with double integrals
include things like the area of
region,
its mass if it has a density,
the average value of some
function,
for example,
the average value of the x and
y coordinates,
which we called the center of
mass or moments of inertia.
So, these are just formulas to
remember.
So, for example,
the area of region is the
double integral of just dA,
or if it helps you,
one dA if you want.
You are integrating the
function 1.
You have to remember formulas
for mass,
for the average value of a
function is the F bar,
in particular x bar y bar,
which is the center of mass,
and the moment of inertia.
OK, so the polar moment of
inertia, which is moment of
inertia about the origin.
OK, so that's double integral
of x squared plus y squared,
density dA,
but also moments of inertia
about the x and y axis,
which are given by just taking
one of these guys.
Don't worry about moments of
inertia about an arbitrary line.
I will ask you for a moment of
inertia for some weird line or
something like that.
OK, but these you should know.
Now, what if you somehow,
on the spur of the moment,
you forget, what's the formula
for moment of inertia?
Well, I mean,
I prefer if you know,
but if you have a complete
blank in your memory,
there will still be partial
credit were setting up the
bounds and everything else.
So,
the general rule for the exam
will be if you're stuck in a
calculation or you're missing a
little piece of the puzzle,
try to do as much as you can.
In particular,
try to at least set up the
bounds of the integral.
There will be partial credit
for that always.
So, while we're at it about
grand rules, how about
evaluation?
How about evaluating integrals?
So, once you've set it up,
you have to sometimes compute
it.
First of all,
check just in case the problem
says set up but do not evaluate.
Then, don't waste your time
evaluating it.
If a problem says to compute
it, then you have to compute it.
So, what kinds of integration
techniques do you need to know?
So, you need to know,
you must know,
well, how to integrate the
usual functions like one over x
or x to the n,
or exponential,
sine, cosine,
things like that,
OK, so the usual integrals.
You must know what I will call
easy trigonometry.
OK, I don't want to give you a
complete list.
And the more you ask me about
which ones are on the list,
the more I will add to the
list.
But, those that you know that
you should know,
you should know.
Those that you think you
shouldn't know,
you don't have to know because
I will say what I will say soon.
You should know also
substitution,
how to set U equals something,
and then see,
oh, this becomes u times du,
and so substitution method.
What do I mean by easy
trigonometrics?
Well, certainly you should know
how to ingrate sine.
You should know how to
integrate cosine.
You should be aware that sine
squared plus cosine squared
simplifies to one.
And, you should be aware of
general things like that.
I would like you to know,
maybe, the double angles,
sine 2x and cosine 2x.
Know what these are,
and the kinds of the easy
things you can do with that,
also things that involve
substitution setting like U
equals sine T or U equals cosine
T.
I mean, let me,
instead, give an example of
hard trig that you don't need to
know, and then I will answer.
OK, so, not needed on Thursday;
it doesn't mean that I don't
want you to know them.
I would love you to know every
single integral formula.
But, that shouldn't be your top
priority.
So, you don't need to know
things like hard trigonometric
ones.
So, let me give you an example.
OK, so if I ask you to do this
one, then actually I will give
you maybe, you know,
I will reprint the formula from
the notes or something like
that.
OK, so that one you don't need
to know.
I would love if you happen to
know it, but if you need it,
it will be given to you.
So, these kinds of things that
you cannot compute by any easy
method.
And, integration by parts,
I believe that I successfully
test-solved all the problems
without doing any single
integration by parts.
Again, in general,
it's something that I would
like you to know,
but it shouldn't be a top
priority for this week.
OK, sorry, you had a question,
or?
Inverse trigonometric
functions: let's say the most
easy ones.
I would like you to know the
easiest inverse trig functions,
but not much.
OK, OK, so be aware that these
functions exist,
but it's not a top priority.
I should say,
the more I tell you I don't
need you to know,
the more your physics and other
teachers might complain that,
oh, these guys don't know how
to integrate.
So, try not to forget
everything.
But, yes?
No, no, here I just mean for
evaluating just a single
variable integral.
I will get to change variables
and Jacobian soon,
but I'm thinking of this as a
different topic.
What I mean by this one is if
I'm asking you to integrate,
I don't know,
what's a good example?
Zero to one t dt over square
root of one plus t squared,
then you should think of maybe
substituting u equals one plus t
squared,
and then it becomes easier.
OK, so this kind of trig,
that's what I have in mind here
specifically.
And again,
if you're stuck,
in particular,
if you hit this dreaded guy,
and you don't actually have a
formula giving you what it is,
it means one of two things.
One is something's wrong with
your solution.
The other option is something
is wrong with my problem.
So, either way,
check quickly what you've done
it if you can't find a mistake,
then just move ahead to the
next problem.
Which one, this one?
Yeah,
I mean if you can do it,
if you know how to do it,
which everything is fair:
I mean,
generally speaking,
give enough of it so that you
found the solution by yourself,
not like,
you know, it didn't somehow
come to you by magic.
But, yeah, if you know how to
integrate this without doing the
substitution,
that's absolutely fine by me.
Just show enough work.
The general rule is show enough
work that we see that you knew
what you are doing.
OK, now another thing we've
seen with double integrals is
how to do more complicated
changes of variables.
So, when you want to replace x
and y by some variables,
u and v, given by some formulas
in terms of x and y.
So, you need to remember
basically how to do them.
So, you need to remember that
the method consists of three
steps.
So, one is you have to find the
Jacobian.
And, you can choose to do
either this Jacobian or the
inverse one depending on what's
easiest given what you're given.
You don't have to worry about
solving for things the other way
around.
Just compute one of these
Jacobians.
And then, the rule is that du
dv is absolute value of the
Jacobian dx dy.
So, that takes care of dx dy,
how to convert that into du dv.
The second thing to know is
that,
well,
you need to of course
substitute any x and y's in the
integrand to convert them to u's
and v's so that you have a valid
integrand involving only u and
v.
And then, the last part is
setting up the bounds.
And you see that,
probably you seen on P-sets and
an example we did in the lecture
that this can be complicated.
But now, in real life,
you do this actually to
simplify the integrals.
So,
probably the one that will be
there on Thursday,
if there's a problem about that
on Thursday,
it will be a situation where
the bounds that you get after
changing variables are
reasonably easy.
OK, I'm not saying that it will
be completely obvious
necessarily, but it will be a
fairly easy situation.
So, the general method is you
look at your region,
R, and it might have various
sides.
Well, on each side you ask
yourself, what do I know about x
and y, and how to convert that
in terms of u and v?
And maybe you'll find that the
equation might be just u equals
zero for example,
or u equals v,
or something like that.
And then, it's up to you to
decide what you want to do.
But, maybe the easiest usually
is to draw a new picture in
terms of u and v coordinates of
what your region will look like
in the new coordinates.
It might be that it will
actually much easier.
It should be easier looking
than what you started with.
OK, so that's the general idea.
There is one change of variable
problem on each of the two
practice exams to give you a
feeling for what's realistic.
The problem that's on practice
exam 3B actually is on the hard
side of things because the
question is kind of hidden in a
way.
So, if you look at problem six,
you might find that it's not
telling you very clearly what
you have to do.
That's because it was meant to
be the hardest problem on that
test.
But, once you've reduced it to
an actual change of variables
problem, I expect you to be able
to know how to do it.
And, on practice exam 3A,
there's also,
I think it's problem five on
the other practice exam.
And, that one is actually
pretty standard and
straightforward.
OK, time to move on, sorry.
So, we've also seen about line
integrals.
OK,
so line integrals,
so the main thing to know about
them,
so the line integral for work,
which is line integral of F.dr,
so let's say that your vector
field has components,
M and N.
So, the line integral for work
becomes in coordinates integral
of Mdx plus Ndy while we've also
seen line integral for flux.
So, line integral of F.n ds
becomes the integral along C
just to make sure that I give it
to you correctly.
So, remember that just,
I don't want to make the
mistake in front of you.
So, T ds is dx, dy.
And, the normal vector,
so, T ds goes along the curve.
Nds goes clockwise
perpendicular to the curve.
So, it's going to be,
well, it's going to be dy and
negative dx.
So, you will be integrating
negative Ndx plus Mdy.
OK, see, if you are blanking
and don't remember the signs,
then you can just draw this
picture and make sure that you
get it right.
So, you should know a little
bit about geometric
interpretation and how to see
easily that it's going to be
zero in some cases.
But, mostly you should know how
to compute, set up and compute
these things.
So, what do we do when we are
here?
Well, it's year,
we have both x and y together,
but we want to,
because it's the line integral,
there should be only one
variable.
So, the important thing to know
is we want to reduce everything
to a single parameter.
OK, so the evaluation method is
always by reducing to a single
parameter.
So, for example,
maybe x and y are both
functions of some variable,
t,
and then express everything in
terms of some integral of,
some quantity involving t dt.
It could be that you will just
express everything in terms of x
or in terms of y,
or in terms of some angle or
something.
It's up to you to choose how to
parameterize things.
And then, when you're there,
it's a usual one variable
integral with a single variable
in there.
OK, so that's the general
method of calculation,
but we've seen a shortcut for
work when we can show that the
field is the gradient of
potential.
So,
one thing to know is if the
curl of F,
which is an x minus My happens
to be zero,
well,
and now I can say,
and the domain is simply
connected,
or if the field is defined
everywhere,
then F is actually a gradient
field.
So, that means,
just to make it more concrete,
that means we can find a
function little f called the
potential such that its
derivative respect to x is M,
and its derivative with respect
to Y is N.
We can solve these two
conditions for the same
function, f, simultaneously.
And, how do we find this
function, little f?
OK, so that's the same as
saying that the field,
big F, is the gradient of
little f.
And, how do we find this
function, little f?
Well, we've seen two methods.
One of them involves computing
a line integral from the origin
to a point in the plane by going
first along the x axis,
then vertically.
The other method was to first
figure out what this one tells
us by integrating it with
respect to x.
And then, we differentiate our
answer with respect to y,
and we compare with that to get
the complete answer.
OK, so I is that relevant?
Well,
first of all it's relevant in
physics,
but it's also relevant just to
calculation of line integrals
because we see the fundamental
theorem of calculus for line
integrals which says if we are
integrating a gradient field and
we know what the potential is.
Then, we just have to,
well, the line integral is just
the change in value of a
potential.
OK, so we take the value of a
potential at the starting point,
sorry, we take value potential
at the endpoint minus the value
at the starting point.
And, that will give us the line
integral, OK?
So, important:
this is only for work.
There's no statement like that
for flux, OK,
so don't tried to fly this in a
problem about flux.
I mean, usually,
if you look at the practice
exams,
you will see it's pretty clear
that there's one problem in
which you are supposed to do
things this way.
It's kind of a dead giveaway,
but it's probably not too bad.
OK, and the other thing we've
seen, so I mentioned it at the
beginning but let me mention it
again.
To compute things,
Green's theorem,
let's just compute,
well, let us forget,
sorry, find the value of a line
integral along the closed curve
by reducing it to double
integral.
So,
the one for work says -- --
this,
and you should remember that in
there,
so C is a closed curve that
goes counterclockwise,
and R is the region inside.
So, the way you would,
if you had to compute both
sides separately,
you would do them in extremely
different ways,
right?
This one is a line integral.
So, you use the method to
explain here,
namely, you express x and y in
terms of a single variable.
See that you're doing a circle.
I want to see a theta.
I don't want to see an R.
R is not a variable.
You are on the circle.
This one is a double integral.
So, if you are doing it,
say, on a disk,
you would have both R and theta
if you're using polar
coordinates.
You would have both x and y.
Here, you have two variables of
integration.
Here, you should have only one
after you parameterize the
curve.
And, the fact that it stays
curl F, I mean,
curl F is just Nx-My is just
like any function of x and y.
OK, the fact that we called it
curl F doesn't change how you
compute it.
You have first to compute the
curl of F.
Say you find,
I don't know,
xy minus x squared,
well, it becomes just the usual
double integral of the usual
function xy minus x squared.
There's nothing special to it
because it's a curl.
And, the other one is the
counterpart for flux.
So, it says this,
and remember this is mx plus
ny.
I mean, what's important about
these statements is not only
remembering, you know,
if you just know this formula
by heart,
you are still in trouble
because you need to know what
actually the symbols in here
mean.
So, you should remember,
what is this line integral,
and what's the divergence of a
field?
So, just something to remember.
And, so I guess I'll let you
figure out practice problems
because it's time,
but I think that's basically
the list of all we've seen.
And, well, that should be it.
