Mathematics Stack Exchange is a question and answer site for people studying math at any level and professionals in related fields. It's 100% free, no registration required.

Sign up
Here's how it works:
  1. Anybody can ask a question
  2. Anybody can answer
  3. The best answers are voted up and rise to the top

When minimizing a surface area with respect to a fixed volume $V$, I found in some notes that the parametrization $X: U \longrightarrow \mathbb{R}^3$ must satisfy the equality $\iint_U (2H - \lambda) \langle \varphi, N \rangle du dv = 0$ for all variations $\varphi$, where $N$ is the normal, $\lambda$ is some constant and $H$ is the mean curvature. I know that it's related to some constraint, so there's the Lagrange multiplier $\lambda$, however I didn't understand this well.

Thanks in advance.

share|cite|improve this question
I like to think of this in physical terms as a bubble enclosing a fixed amount of air. The forces on any patch of the bubble are $-2H\mathbf N$ due to the surface tension of the bubble, and $\lambda\mathbf N$ due to the pressure of the air inside. Then your equation merely states that the bubble is in equilibrium. Of course, this is not a rigorous mathematical explanation. – Rahul Feb 3 '13 at 21:16
Yes, the physical picture is so nicely fits in with the mathematical counter parts. – Narasimham Aug 14 '14 at 18:18
up vote 2 down vote accepted

it's related to some constraint

This is correct: the constraint is that the surface must enclose volume $V$. The test function $\varphi$ describes a variation of the surface: we compare the original parametrization $X:U\to\mathbb R^3$ again the perturbed $X+\epsilon\varphi $. We are interested in the first derivative with respect to $\epsilon$, evaluated at $\epsilon=0$. For the surface area this derivative turns out to be $\iint_U 2H\langle \varphi, N\rangle $, and for the volume it is simply $\iint_U \langle \varphi, N\rangle $. At a critical point the gradient of the objective (surface area) is a multiple of the gradient of the constraint (volume). Hence, $\iint_U (2H-\lambda)\langle \varphi, N\rangle =0$.

It is not surprising that only the normal component of $\varphi$ matters. It should be geometrically intuitive that variation in tangential directions has $o(\epsilon)$ effect on both surface area and the enclosed volume. For this reason, it is convenient to consider only normal variations: that is, $\varphi=\psi N$ where $\psi$ is a scalar function.

The Wikipedia article on CMC surfaces has a lot of references, some of them expository.

share|cite|improve this answer
@Rahul Yes, the physical picture beautifully fits in with the mathematical counter parts.Equilibrium of forces : T( 1/R1 + 1/R2 ) = p where T is surface tension, p is pressure inside the soap bubble. The quantity in brackets is 2H, constant for CMC surfaces.The constant Lambda is exactly p/T!! – Narasimham Aug 14 '14 at 18:34

Your Answer


By posting your answer, you agree to the privacy policy and terms of service.

Not the answer you're looking for? Browse other questions tagged or ask your own question.