I've seen the same question as above for both the geometric derivation of polar coordinates and the x-y transformation of polar coordinates. The first answer states that:

"In the geometric approach, dr2=0 as it is not only small but also symmetric (see here)." And links to a wikipedia article on exterior algebra. Could someone clarify this for me? To reiterate:

Given the polar coordinates of a 'circular wedge' Geometrically, the exact area would be $$\frac{(r+dr)^2dθ}{2}−\frac{r^2dθ}{2}$$ $$=(r+\frac{dr}{2})drdθ$$ $$= r dr d\theta + \frac{dr^2 d\theta}{2}$$ How do we get rid of $\frac{dr^2dθ}{2}$? Why are we allowed to consider it insiginficant to the point where we can ignore it as opposed to keeping the tiny values of $dr$ and $d\theta$

  • 2
    $\begingroup$ at small enough $\Delta r$ and $\Delta\theta$ (i.e. $dr,d\theta$) we can visualise the area as a rectangle of side length $dr$ and $rd\theta$. Hence the area is $rdrd\theta$ $\endgroup$ – Henry Lee Feb 19 at 15:33
  • $\begingroup$ You are asking for a rigorous proof, but you haven't provided a rigorous definition of differentials. What you ask for isn't truly possible until you define differentials and their properties in a rigorous manner. $\endgroup$ – Brevan Ellefsen Feb 19 at 22:58

The meaning of $dA=r dr d\theta$ is that when you integrate over a region with respect to $dA$, you get the same result as you do by parametrizing it in polar coordinates and integrating with respect to the differential $r dr d \theta$.

Thus your question (because $d\theta$ is not a problem) reduces to showing that "integrating" against a differential like "$(dr)^2$" gives zero. What this actually means is that sums of the form $S=\sum_i f(r_i) (\Delta r)_i^2$ should all go to zero as you refine the partition.

For bounded $f$ for example $|S| \leq ML\delta$ where $M$ is the bound on $|f|$, $L$ is the total length of the interval, and $\delta$ is the longest of the $(\Delta r)_i$'s. This indeed goes to zero as $\delta \to 0$.

The point can be understood without inspecting all the details by just counting how many terms there are (call that $n$) and how small the individual terms are relative to that (which is on the order of $1/n^2$).




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.