3
$\begingroup$

enter image description here

The volume of the object in the above picture is given by, $$V=\int_{0}^{4} \pi y^2dx$$

While dealing with calculating surface areas of objects, I was introduced to the integral, $$S=\int_{0}^{4} 2\pi y\sqrt{1+(y')^2} dx$$ where $\sqrt{1+(y')^2} dx$ is the infinitesimal arc length.

Is it reasonable to improve the definition of the volume of a solid object to be $V=\int_{0}^{4} \pi y^2\sqrt{1+(y')^2} dx$?


enter image description here

Geometrically, the segment length is a better approximation. However, when the interval tends to zero, the arc, segment and $\Delta x$ tend to coincide. So, as the interval goes to zero, I can consider the infinitesimal segment length instead of $dx$, can I not?

What I would like to know is if $V=\int_{0}^{4} \pi y^2\sqrt{1+(y')^2} dx$ is valid or not. If not, then why?

$\endgroup$
  • 2
    $\begingroup$ Aren't your two $V$s not equal? So no? $\endgroup$ – Shuri2060 Jul 6 '17 at 12:55
  • $\begingroup$ Compute the volume of the circular cylinder obtained by rotating the line $y=1$ around the $x$ axis and bounded by $x=0$ and $x=1$. Then compute the volume of the union of the same cylinder but bounded by $x=1/n$ and $x=1$ with the cone generated by revolving $y=nx$ around the $x$ axis and bounded between $x=0$ and $x=1/n$. Take the limit as $n\to\infty$. $\endgroup$ – Bettybel Jul 6 '17 at 13:09
  • $\begingroup$ The volume of the shown paraboloid is not $\int_{0}^{4}\pi y^2\,dy$ but $$ V=\int_{0}^{4} \pi x\,dx = \color{red}{8\pi}$$ since the section $x=k$, for any $k\in[0,4]$, is a circle having area $\pi x$. $\endgroup$ – Jack D'Aurizio Jul 6 '17 at 14:34
  • $\begingroup$ The surface area is given by $$ \int_{0}^{4}2\pi g(x)\sqrt{1+g'(x)^2}\,dx $$ where $g(x)=\sqrt{x}$ (see here: tutorial.math.lamar.edu/Classes/CalcII/SurfaceArea.aspx) hence $$ S = \int_{0}^{4}2\pi \sqrt{x+\frac{1}{4}}\,dx =\color{red}{\frac{\pi}{6}\left(17\sqrt{17}-1\right)}.$$ $\endgroup$ – Jack D'Aurizio Jul 6 '17 at 14:38
  • $\begingroup$ Jack, I believe you mistyped. I did state that the volume was $\int_{0}^{4} \pi y^2 dx$. I am aware of the concept of evaluating Surface areas. If you look closely, I am asking for something else. $\endgroup$ – R004 Jul 6 '17 at 17:47
1
$\begingroup$

This is perhaps best explained in terms of Pappus's Centroid Theorems:

Pappus's $(1^{st})$ Centroid Theorem states that the surface area $A$ of a surface of revolution generated by rotating a plane curve $C$ about an axis external to $C$and on the same plane is equal to the product of the arc length $s$ of $C$ and the distance d traveled by its geometric centroid (Pappus's centroid theorem). Simply put, $S=2\pi RL$, where $R$ is the normal distance of the centroid to the axis of revolution and $L$ is curve length. The centroid of a curve is given by

$$\mathbf{R}=\frac{\int \mathbf{r}ds}{\int ds}=\frac{1}{L} \int \mathbf{r}ds$$

Pappus's $(2^{nd})$ Centroid Theorem says the volume of a planar area of revolution is the product of the area $A$ and the length of the path traced by its centroid $R$, i.e., $2πR$. The bottom line is that the volume is given simply by $V=2πRA$. The centroid of a volume is given by

$$\mathbf{R}=\frac{\int_A \mathbf{r}dA}{\int_A dA}=\frac{1}{A} \int_A \mathbf{r}dA$$

Thus we can say for your cases that

$$ S=2\pi\int_0^4 y\ ds =2\pi\int_0^4 y\sqrt{1+y'^2} dx\\ V=\pi\int_0^4 y^2\ dx $$

This is just as stated in the OP. Notice that here, the length, $L$ and the volume, $V$ have cancelled out, thus disguising the true nature of the equations.

Now, clearly you can't have

$$V=\pi\int_0^4 y^2\ dx=\pi\int_0^4 y^2\sqrt{1+y'^2} ~dx$$

But more to the point, the volume pertains to the area under the curve, whereas, the term $\sqrt{1+y'^2}$ in the surface area equation refers to the area along the arc of $ds$ and it has nothing to do with the volume of revolution.

$\endgroup$
  • $\begingroup$ The geometry seems to confuse me. The segment length appears to be a better approximation than $\Delta x$. As the interval falls to zero, the segment length and $\Delta x$ fall on each other. The difference in lengths becomes insignificant. However, replacing $dx$ with the infinitesimal segment length does not yield the right result. The geometry suggests whereas the math does not. $\endgroup$ – R004 Jul 7 '17 at 2:27
  • $\begingroup$ Oh! Wait a minute. I realized where I went wrong. My integrand was a product of the slant height of a frustum and the area of a circle. This is wrong because the volume of a cylinder is not the mentioned product. Ah! Silly mistake. $\endgroup$ – R004 Jul 7 '17 at 3:23
  • $\begingroup$ This brings me to another question. Can I calculate the volume of a solid by integrating infinitesimal frustum volumes? The reason why I asked this is because in wiggly, non-cylindrical solids, a frustum is a better approximation than a cylinder. Well, as $\Delta x$ goes to zero, the frustum and the cylinder become identical. I'm not sure if integrating frustum volumes will give us better results. But I am sure that the process will become complicated. $\endgroup$ – R004 Jul 7 '17 at 3:29
  • 1
    $\begingroup$ I haven't the time to replicate what he has done, but he's has not demonstrated that the integral over $dx$ is the same as that over $ds$. It looks pretty sophisticated but you are better off sticking with the well-established mathematics. As for myself, I never think in in terms of discs and washers, but always use Pappus's theorems which are easy to remember and foolproof. $\endgroup$ – Cye Waldman Jul 7 '17 at 15:06
  • 1
    $\begingroup$ It doesn't matter, you absolutely must end up with the same integral; it's just a matter of how you get there-and with what certainty. $\endgroup$ – Cye Waldman Jul 7 '17 at 15:47
0
$\begingroup$

It is reasonable to improve the definition of the volume of a solid object that can be defined to be

$$V=\int_{0}^{4} \pi y^2 dx$$

by assembly of infinitesimally thin disks shown, so that the direction of building up of volume is strictly perpendicular to the base circle plane.

( Surface area of the solid is obtained by assembling lateral areas of connected cones).

$\endgroup$

Your Answer

By clicking “Post Your Answer”, you agree to our terms of service, privacy policy and cookie policy

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