ไม่สามารถเล่นวิดีโอนี้
ขออภัยในความไม่สะดวก

Volume in cylindrical coordinates | MIT 18.02SC Multivariable Calculus, Fall 2010

แชร์
ฝัง
  • เผยแพร่เมื่อ 2 ม.ค. 2011
  • Volume in cylindrical coordinates
    Instructor: Joel Lewis
    View the complete course: ocw.mit.edu/18-...
    License: Creative Commons BY-NC-SA
    More information at ocw.mit.edu/terms
    More courses at ocw.mit.edu

ความคิดเห็น • 36

  • @robpatterson2861
    @robpatterson2861 ปีที่แล้ว +4

    I love your videos! I'm so glad to have stumbled apon them. Examples are the best! To get that visualization of it really helps. I'm 57 and just having fun! Thanks!

  • @prathikkannan3324
    @prathikkannan3324 24 วันที่ผ่านมา

    Thanks Joel! I found the accompanying lecture pretty tough and this helped clarify some doubts.

  • @ayhanbozkurt937
    @ayhanbozkurt937 6 ปีที่แล้ว +1

    the most useful lesson so far i encountered in youtube.

  • @TheAhmedMAhmed
    @TheAhmedMAhmed 11 ปีที่แล้ว +34

    u sound a bit like the joker from the dark night
    :o

  • @harrydiv321
    @harrydiv321 3 หลายเดือนก่อน +1

    if you parameterize the region as
    x = r cos theta
    y = 1 + r sin theta
    z = z
    where
    0

    • @middlevoids
      @middlevoids หลายเดือนก่อน +1

      Be lazy!

  • @mousavi128
    @mousavi128 11 ปีที่แล้ว +11

    I wish I was at MIT

  • @ricardo4fun922
    @ricardo4fun922 6 ปีที่แล้ว +5

    For those who care the final answer is pi/2.

  • @pedroff_1
    @pedroff_1 6 ปีที่แล้ว +7

    Was a triple integral really required? Since the beginning, I was expecting it to result in a double integral where the function being integrated would be the difference in height between the parabola and the plane, which is the first thing you get when solving the innermost integral.

    • @sathvikswaminathan7933
      @sathvikswaminathan7933 4 ปีที่แล้ว +1

      Yep, it's not necessary to use a triple integral in this case. But it'll be when we are integrating the area element with some function dependent on the x,y,z variables.

    • @nizarch22
      @nizarch22 3 ปีที่แล้ว

      @@sathvikswaminathan7933 No. It is absolutely necessary -- you cannot solve the question without it. You're calculating volume, not surface area. And what he used was a volume element, not a surface element.

    • @erikumble
      @erikumble 3 ปีที่แล้ว

      @@nizarch22 Actually, since the inner function is just 1, you do not need to use a triple integral, if you could instead define a function that gives the height of the solid at an (x,y) coordinate, which is what you get after computing the innermost integral. As Sathvik mentioned, when more complicated functions of x, y, and z are involved than simply 1, it is "necessary" to use triple integrals. In this case, the function is easy to practice setting limits of integration.
      To note, however: multiple integrals simplify down to just one, so it is usually not "necessary" to use several, but it makes setting up the problem and remembering formulas much easier.

  • @MarikoIchigo
    @MarikoIchigo 12 ปีที่แล้ว +3

    Things are making more sense now...

  • @vincec894
    @vincec894 ปีที่แล้ว

    Its crazy how this is taught the same exact way at my small hometown university

  • @springrollies
    @springrollies 11 ปีที่แล้ว +2

    the upper part's volume would be infinity, so it has to be the lower one

  • @Anti-Prolixity
    @Anti-Prolixity 12 ปีที่แล้ว

    @ny1fanta Depends on the shadow region. Shadow region (relative to origin) goes from 0 to pi.

  • @shariffross3920
    @shariffross3920 4 ปีที่แล้ว +1

    "let me shade the region i like doing that"

  • @anhtho3008
    @anhtho3008 11 ปีที่แล้ว +1

    so how do I know if it's not the upper part ( the remaning bigger part of the paraboloid after being cut by the plane ) but the lower one?

    • @apb8813
      @apb8813 10 หลายเดือนก่อน

      the upper part of the parabola would be infinite. We're interested in a finite volume.

  • @jak712we
    @jak712we 12 ปีที่แล้ว +1

    thanks Joel

  • @av733
    @av733 11 ปีที่แล้ว +1

    This guy is great

  • @davidzhang8764
    @davidzhang8764 9 ปีที่แล้ว +1

    Is the lower bound of z correct?

    • @Devil-Jin-yt
      @Devil-Jin-yt 6 ปีที่แล้ว +1

      David Zhang yes brother, as the equation of plane is z=2y
      And in polar form y should be written as r sin theta..
      Hope it helps

  • @shreyatomar1435
    @shreyatomar1435 3 ปีที่แล้ว

    Thank you 🙏🏻

  • @bobkameron
    @bobkameron 3 ปีที่แล้ว

    took some time but good exercise!

  • @persianshawn92
    @persianshawn92 8 ปีที่แล้ว

    can someone explain why r goes from 0 to 2sin*teta* ? where does the 2 come from?

    • @Speedfinders
      @Speedfinders 8 ปีที่แล้ว

      +Shahin Sateei I guess it's because he's talking about theta from 0 to pi and not 0 to 2*pi, that should be the same at last.

    • @johannesnssethillestad3436
      @johannesnssethillestad3436 8 ปีที่แล้ว +5

      +Shahin Sateei
      The region R is described (in polar coordinates) by the equation r=2*sin(*theta*). Measured from the Cartesian origin, the lowest r possible is 0 (*theta* equals *Pi* or 0), and the largest r possible is 2, when *theta* equals *Pi*/2. Because the value of is dependent of *theta* the limits of integration for r is (0,2*sin(*theta*)). The number 2 comes from the maximum distance from the Cartesian origin to the circle C.
      Hope this was helpful :)

    • @urmitmahida5725
      @urmitmahida5725 8 ปีที่แล้ว +8

      use cartesian & polar relations x=rcos theta & y=rsin theta in X^2+y^2=2y u will get the limit of r=0 &2 sin theta

  • @ny1fanta
    @ny1fanta 12 ปีที่แล้ว +2

    i thought theta is from 0 -> 2pi

    • @T4l0nITA
      @T4l0nITA 5 ปีที่แล้ว +2

      It's just pi because r starts from the origin (0), not from y=1 (the center of the circle), as you can see it doesn't go all around but just 180 degrees

  • @bobkameron
    @bobkameron 3 ปีที่แล้ว

    great!

  • @joe_mama92
    @joe_mama92 ปีที่แล้ว

    Ambatukam

  • @TheFarmanimalfriend
    @TheFarmanimalfriend 3 ปีที่แล้ว +1

    adding r changes the value of the equation. Shame on you!

  • @joe_mama92
    @joe_mama92 ปีที่แล้ว

    Ambatukam