Surface area of a sphere with integration of disks












2












$begingroup$


Why it is not correct to say that the surface area of a sphere is:



$$
2 int_{0}^{R} 2pi r text{ } dr
$$



In my mind we are summing up the perimeters of disks from $r=0$ to $r=R$, so by 1 integration, we would have $frac{1}{2}$ of the surface area of the sphere.



I know that it's not correct because that will give us $2pi R^2$ that it's different from $4pi R^2$, but why???



Thanks!










share|cite|improve this question











$endgroup$








  • 1




    $begingroup$
    It's bad form, and technically incorrect, to have one of the limits of integration depend on the variable of integration. What does it mean to say "to $r=r$"? Isn't $r=r$ always true since $r$ varies between $0$ and some fixed positive constant? It'd be better to call this constant $R$ to keep it separate from the variable $r$. This is more of a side note.
    $endgroup$
    – tilper
    Mar 27 '17 at 17:37












  • $begingroup$
    @tilper fixed It, thanks
    $endgroup$
    – Bruno Reis
    Mar 27 '17 at 17:41










  • $begingroup$
    If your method was correct, then you should get the same answer for a cone whose base radius and height are equal. But you don't, do you?
    $endgroup$
    – uniquesolution
    Mar 27 '17 at 17:54
















2












$begingroup$


Why it is not correct to say that the surface area of a sphere is:



$$
2 int_{0}^{R} 2pi r text{ } dr
$$



In my mind we are summing up the perimeters of disks from $r=0$ to $r=R$, so by 1 integration, we would have $frac{1}{2}$ of the surface area of the sphere.



I know that it's not correct because that will give us $2pi R^2$ that it's different from $4pi R^2$, but why???



Thanks!










share|cite|improve this question











$endgroup$








  • 1




    $begingroup$
    It's bad form, and technically incorrect, to have one of the limits of integration depend on the variable of integration. What does it mean to say "to $r=r$"? Isn't $r=r$ always true since $r$ varies between $0$ and some fixed positive constant? It'd be better to call this constant $R$ to keep it separate from the variable $r$. This is more of a side note.
    $endgroup$
    – tilper
    Mar 27 '17 at 17:37












  • $begingroup$
    @tilper fixed It, thanks
    $endgroup$
    – Bruno Reis
    Mar 27 '17 at 17:41










  • $begingroup$
    If your method was correct, then you should get the same answer for a cone whose base radius and height are equal. But you don't, do you?
    $endgroup$
    – uniquesolution
    Mar 27 '17 at 17:54














2












2








2


1



$begingroup$


Why it is not correct to say that the surface area of a sphere is:



$$
2 int_{0}^{R} 2pi r text{ } dr
$$



In my mind we are summing up the perimeters of disks from $r=0$ to $r=R$, so by 1 integration, we would have $frac{1}{2}$ of the surface area of the sphere.



I know that it's not correct because that will give us $2pi R^2$ that it's different from $4pi R^2$, but why???



Thanks!










share|cite|improve this question











$endgroup$




Why it is not correct to say that the surface area of a sphere is:



$$
2 int_{0}^{R} 2pi r text{ } dr
$$



In my mind we are summing up the perimeters of disks from $r=0$ to $r=R$, so by 1 integration, we would have $frac{1}{2}$ of the surface area of the sphere.



I know that it's not correct because that will give us $2pi R^2$ that it's different from $4pi R^2$, but why???



Thanks!







integration geometry definite-integrals spheres






share|cite|improve this question















share|cite|improve this question













share|cite|improve this question




share|cite|improve this question








edited Mar 27 '17 at 17:40







Bruno Reis

















asked Mar 27 '17 at 17:31









Bruno ReisBruno Reis

1,002418




1,002418








  • 1




    $begingroup$
    It's bad form, and technically incorrect, to have one of the limits of integration depend on the variable of integration. What does it mean to say "to $r=r$"? Isn't $r=r$ always true since $r$ varies between $0$ and some fixed positive constant? It'd be better to call this constant $R$ to keep it separate from the variable $r$. This is more of a side note.
    $endgroup$
    – tilper
    Mar 27 '17 at 17:37












  • $begingroup$
    @tilper fixed It, thanks
    $endgroup$
    – Bruno Reis
    Mar 27 '17 at 17:41










  • $begingroup$
    If your method was correct, then you should get the same answer for a cone whose base radius and height are equal. But you don't, do you?
    $endgroup$
    – uniquesolution
    Mar 27 '17 at 17:54














  • 1




    $begingroup$
    It's bad form, and technically incorrect, to have one of the limits of integration depend on the variable of integration. What does it mean to say "to $r=r$"? Isn't $r=r$ always true since $r$ varies between $0$ and some fixed positive constant? It'd be better to call this constant $R$ to keep it separate from the variable $r$. This is more of a side note.
    $endgroup$
    – tilper
    Mar 27 '17 at 17:37












  • $begingroup$
    @tilper fixed It, thanks
    $endgroup$
    – Bruno Reis
    Mar 27 '17 at 17:41










  • $begingroup$
    If your method was correct, then you should get the same answer for a cone whose base radius and height are equal. But you don't, do you?
    $endgroup$
    – uniquesolution
    Mar 27 '17 at 17:54








1




1




$begingroup$
It's bad form, and technically incorrect, to have one of the limits of integration depend on the variable of integration. What does it mean to say "to $r=r$"? Isn't $r=r$ always true since $r$ varies between $0$ and some fixed positive constant? It'd be better to call this constant $R$ to keep it separate from the variable $r$. This is more of a side note.
$endgroup$
– tilper
Mar 27 '17 at 17:37






$begingroup$
It's bad form, and technically incorrect, to have one of the limits of integration depend on the variable of integration. What does it mean to say "to $r=r$"? Isn't $r=r$ always true since $r$ varies between $0$ and some fixed positive constant? It'd be better to call this constant $R$ to keep it separate from the variable $r$. This is more of a side note.
$endgroup$
– tilper
Mar 27 '17 at 17:37














$begingroup$
@tilper fixed It, thanks
$endgroup$
– Bruno Reis
Mar 27 '17 at 17:41




$begingroup$
@tilper fixed It, thanks
$endgroup$
– Bruno Reis
Mar 27 '17 at 17:41












$begingroup$
If your method was correct, then you should get the same answer for a cone whose base radius and height are equal. But you don't, do you?
$endgroup$
– uniquesolution
Mar 27 '17 at 17:54




$begingroup$
If your method was correct, then you should get the same answer for a cone whose base radius and height are equal. But you don't, do you?
$endgroup$
– uniquesolution
Mar 27 '17 at 17:54










6 Answers
6






active

oldest

votes


















3












$begingroup$

In order to give a short explanation of the mistake :



In writing $quad 2 int_{0}^{R} 2pi r text{ } dr quad$ you sum elementary areas $quad dA=2pi:r:drquad$



that is to say, a strip length$=2pi r$ and width$=dr$.



The hitch is that the width is not $dr$ but is $ds$ (see the figure).



With a few calculus, you can find $quad ds=frac{R}{sqrt{R^2-r^2}}dr quadtoquad dA=2pi:rfrac{R}{sqrt{R^2-r^2}}dr $



$$quad 2 int_{0}^{R} 2pi:rfrac{R}{sqrt{R^2-r^2}}dr =4pi R^2$$



This is a method to find the area of the sphere. Of course, a simpler method consists in doing the job in spherical coordinates instead of Cartesian coordinates.



enter image description here






share|cite|improve this answer









$endgroup$













  • $begingroup$
    Perfect explanation! Thanks!
    $endgroup$
    – Bruno Reis
    Mar 27 '17 at 23:22



















0












$begingroup$

What you are doing is indeed integrating over rings, but then you get the area of a full circle, which was the result of your calculation up to the irrelevant factor of 2.



You can imagine that by adding more and more dense rings you fill a circle with radius $R$ (the upper limit of your integral).



But to get the area of a sphere, you need to parametrize all 3 dimensions.
What you can do is use spherical coordinates, where each point in space is described by a radius $r$, and two angles $theta,phi$ as in the link.



In fact, to get the area of the sphere you need to keep the radius constant, and integrate over the angles that parametrize the given sphere.



The result yields



$$S=int_0^{pi}int_0^{2pi}R^2sintheta dphi dtheta=R^22piint_0^{pi}sintheta dtheta=4pi R^2$$
as it should be.






share|cite|improve this answer











$endgroup$





















    0












    $begingroup$

    A) when you pile up the disks you shall pay attention to law with which $r$ varies (with $h$, $x$, $alpha$ $cdots$) otherwise, as already told you do not make any distinction with a cone, a cylinder,..

    B) adding disks to find volumes is ok, because the volume of the triangular cross-section ring that is left-out is a higher order infinitesimal vs. the volume of the disk; its surface instead is of the same order, and you must consider the hypothenuse instead of the cathetus.






    share|cite|improve this answer









    $endgroup$





















      0












      $begingroup$

      $$text{Area will be}~~: 2 int_{0}^{R} 2pi x ~ ds$$



      Where $ds$ is width of strip bounded by circles of radius $x$ and $x+dx$ situated at height $y$. Also $ds neq dr$ it's tilted in $y$ direction too. Only horizontal projection of $ds$ is $dr$.What you have done is valid for Disk See image below.



      enter image description here



      $$(ds)^2=(dx)^2+(dy)^2$$



      Therefore :
      $$ds = sqrt{1+Bigg( frac{dy}{dx}Bigg)^2}$$
      Now,



      $$x^2 + y^2 = R^2$$
      $$y = sqrt{R^2 - x^2}$$
      $$dfrac{dy}{dx} = dfrac{-2x}{2sqrt{R^2 - x^2}}$$
      $$dfrac{dy}{dx} = dfrac{-x}{sqrt{R^2 - x^2}}$$
      $$left( dfrac{dy}{dx} right)^2 = dfrac{x^2}{R^2 - x^2}$$



      Thus,
      $$displaystyle A = 4pi int_0^R x sqrt{1 + dfrac{x^2}{R^2 - x^2}} , dx$$
      $$displaystyle A = 4pi int_0^R x sqrt{dfrac{(R^2 - x^2) + x^2}{R^2 - x^2}} , dx$$
      $$displaystyle A = 4pi int_0^R x sqrt{dfrac{R^2}{R^2 - x^2}} , dx$$



      Let
      $$x = R sin θ implies
      dx = R cos θ dθ$$



      When $x = 0, θ = 0$
      When $x = R, θ = pi/2$



      Thus,
      $$displaystyle A = 4pi int_0^{pi/2} R sin theta sqrt{dfrac{R^2}{R^2 - R^2 sin^2 theta}} , (R cos theta , dtheta)$$
      $$displaystyle A = 4pi int_0^{pi/2} R^2 sin theta cos thetasqrt{dfrac{R^2}{R^2(1 - sin^2 theta)}} , dtheta$$
      $$displaystyle A = 4pi R^2 int_0^{pi/2} sin theta cos thetasqrt{dfrac{1}{cos^2 theta}} , dtheta$$
      $$displaystyle A = 4pi R^2 int_0^{pi/2} sin theta cos theta left( dfrac{1}{cos theta} right) , dtheta$$
      $$displaystyle A = 4pi R^2 int_0^{pi/2} sin theta , dtheta$$
      $$A = 4pi R^2 bigg[-cos theta bigg]_0^{pi/2}$$
      $$A = 4pi R^2 bigg[-cos frac{1}{2}pi + cos 0 bigg]$$
      $$A = 4pi R^2 bigg[ -0 + 1 bigg]$$
      $$A = 4pi R^2$$






      share|cite|improve this answer











      $endgroup$





















        0












        $begingroup$

        If you consider a formula like



        $$ dA = 2 pi r , dr$$



        for a cylinder, it is zero and so fails.



        If you consider a formula for a cylinder,



        $$ dA = 2 pi r , dz$$



        it seems to be correct.



        However, for a cone $dz=0$ so even this formula fails.



        Intuition says $dr,dz$ should both be involved.



        In fact if you recall cone formula $ A = pi,r, s = 2 pi, bar {r} , s ,, dA= 2pi r ds $



        slant generator is correct in principle.



        We have cone differential area



        $$ dA = 2 pi r ds = 2 pi r sqrt{dr^2+dz^2 } $$



        and that should be considered in integration of all surfaces of revolution.






        share|cite|improve this answer









        $endgroup$





















          0












          $begingroup$

          There are two problems here.



          First: Not only do your disks change radius from the apex to the base of the hemisphere, but they do so at a varying rate. Let's say (for concreteness) that the sphere is $x^2 + y^2 + z^2 = R^2$, and we're dividing the sphere into disks based on the $x$-coordinate. If you try to approximate the surface area of a hemisphere of radius $R=1$ by slicing it into disks of radius (say) $0.1, 0.2, ldots, 0.9, 1$, you'll find that the first few small-radius slices are very close together— to be precise, at $x = sqrt{1 - 0.1^2} = 0.994$, $sqrt{1-0.2^2} = 0.980$, $sqrt{1-0.3^2} = 0.954$, and so forth—but the larger slices are much farther apart. If you use the surface areas of these disks to calculate the surface area of the sphere, you have to take into account the fact that the disks have different widths.



          Going from finite to infinitesimal width: The radius of a disk at $x$ is $r = sqrt{R^2-x^2}$ (the inverse of this formula is $x = sqrt{R^2 - r^2}$), so if you make cuts in the sphere each time the radius changes by $dr$, then the slices will have width $-dx = -dr dfrac{dx}{dr} = dfrac{r}{sqrt{R^2-r^2}}, dr$ (the negative sign corrects for the fact that $x$ increases with decreasing $r$).



          Second: The surfaces of the sphere slices that we discuss above have sloping cross-sections (in the $xy$ plane or any plane that includes the $x$-axis), whereas cylinders have flat surface cross-sections. You can ignore the difference this makes for calculating volume, but not for surface area; otherwise you can prove that $pi = 4$. So you need to make another correction: the width of the surface of a disk isn't $dx$ but rather $sqrt{(dx)^2 + (dr)^2} = sqrt{ dfrac{r^2}{R^2 - r^2} + 1}, dr = dfrac{R}{sqrt{R^2 - r^2}}, dr$. Putting this all together and integrating over $r$ (though $x$ would be nicer): The integral that you actually have to do is thus $$begin{align*} &int_0^R (2pi r) frac{R}{sqrt{R^2 - r^2}}, dr \
          =& ;2pi R int_{r=0}^{r=R} frac{-du/2}{sqrt{u}} tag{$u = R^2 - r^2$; $du = -2r, dr$} \
          =& -2pi R left. sqrt{u} right|_{r=0}^{r=R} \
          =& -2pi R left. sqrt{R^2 - r^2}right|_{r=0}^{r=R} \
          =&;2pi R^2
          end{align*}$$

          and this is the result you want.






          share|cite|improve this answer











          $endgroup$













            Your Answer





            StackExchange.ifUsing("editor", function () {
            return StackExchange.using("mathjaxEditing", function () {
            StackExchange.MarkdownEditor.creationCallbacks.add(function (editor, postfix) {
            StackExchange.mathjaxEditing.prepareWmdForMathJax(editor, postfix, [["$", "$"], ["\\(","\\)"]]);
            });
            });
            }, "mathjax-editing");

            StackExchange.ready(function() {
            var channelOptions = {
            tags: "".split(" "),
            id: "69"
            };
            initTagRenderer("".split(" "), "".split(" "), channelOptions);

            StackExchange.using("externalEditor", function() {
            // Have to fire editor after snippets, if snippets enabled
            if (StackExchange.settings.snippets.snippetsEnabled) {
            StackExchange.using("snippets", function() {
            createEditor();
            });
            }
            else {
            createEditor();
            }
            });

            function createEditor() {
            StackExchange.prepareEditor({
            heartbeatType: 'answer',
            autoActivateHeartbeat: false,
            convertImagesToLinks: true,
            noModals: true,
            showLowRepImageUploadWarning: true,
            reputationToPostImages: 10,
            bindNavPrevention: true,
            postfix: "",
            imageUploader: {
            brandingHtml: "Powered by u003ca class="icon-imgur-white" href="https://imgur.com/"u003eu003c/au003e",
            contentPolicyHtml: "User contributions licensed under u003ca href="https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-sa/3.0/"u003ecc by-sa 3.0 with attribution requiredu003c/au003e u003ca href="https://stackoverflow.com/legal/content-policy"u003e(content policy)u003c/au003e",
            allowUrls: true
            },
            noCode: true, onDemand: true,
            discardSelector: ".discard-answer"
            ,immediatelyShowMarkdownHelp:true
            });


            }
            });














            draft saved

            draft discarded


















            StackExchange.ready(
            function () {
            StackExchange.openid.initPostLogin('.new-post-login', 'https%3a%2f%2fmath.stackexchange.com%2fquestions%2f2205612%2fsurface-area-of-a-sphere-with-integration-of-disks%23new-answer', 'question_page');
            }
            );

            Post as a guest















            Required, but never shown

























            6 Answers
            6






            active

            oldest

            votes








            6 Answers
            6






            active

            oldest

            votes









            active

            oldest

            votes






            active

            oldest

            votes









            3












            $begingroup$

            In order to give a short explanation of the mistake :



            In writing $quad 2 int_{0}^{R} 2pi r text{ } dr quad$ you sum elementary areas $quad dA=2pi:r:drquad$



            that is to say, a strip length$=2pi r$ and width$=dr$.



            The hitch is that the width is not $dr$ but is $ds$ (see the figure).



            With a few calculus, you can find $quad ds=frac{R}{sqrt{R^2-r^2}}dr quadtoquad dA=2pi:rfrac{R}{sqrt{R^2-r^2}}dr $



            $$quad 2 int_{0}^{R} 2pi:rfrac{R}{sqrt{R^2-r^2}}dr =4pi R^2$$



            This is a method to find the area of the sphere. Of course, a simpler method consists in doing the job in spherical coordinates instead of Cartesian coordinates.



            enter image description here






            share|cite|improve this answer









            $endgroup$













            • $begingroup$
              Perfect explanation! Thanks!
              $endgroup$
              – Bruno Reis
              Mar 27 '17 at 23:22
















            3












            $begingroup$

            In order to give a short explanation of the mistake :



            In writing $quad 2 int_{0}^{R} 2pi r text{ } dr quad$ you sum elementary areas $quad dA=2pi:r:drquad$



            that is to say, a strip length$=2pi r$ and width$=dr$.



            The hitch is that the width is not $dr$ but is $ds$ (see the figure).



            With a few calculus, you can find $quad ds=frac{R}{sqrt{R^2-r^2}}dr quadtoquad dA=2pi:rfrac{R}{sqrt{R^2-r^2}}dr $



            $$quad 2 int_{0}^{R} 2pi:rfrac{R}{sqrt{R^2-r^2}}dr =4pi R^2$$



            This is a method to find the area of the sphere. Of course, a simpler method consists in doing the job in spherical coordinates instead of Cartesian coordinates.



            enter image description here






            share|cite|improve this answer









            $endgroup$













            • $begingroup$
              Perfect explanation! Thanks!
              $endgroup$
              – Bruno Reis
              Mar 27 '17 at 23:22














            3












            3








            3





            $begingroup$

            In order to give a short explanation of the mistake :



            In writing $quad 2 int_{0}^{R} 2pi r text{ } dr quad$ you sum elementary areas $quad dA=2pi:r:drquad$



            that is to say, a strip length$=2pi r$ and width$=dr$.



            The hitch is that the width is not $dr$ but is $ds$ (see the figure).



            With a few calculus, you can find $quad ds=frac{R}{sqrt{R^2-r^2}}dr quadtoquad dA=2pi:rfrac{R}{sqrt{R^2-r^2}}dr $



            $$quad 2 int_{0}^{R} 2pi:rfrac{R}{sqrt{R^2-r^2}}dr =4pi R^2$$



            This is a method to find the area of the sphere. Of course, a simpler method consists in doing the job in spherical coordinates instead of Cartesian coordinates.



            enter image description here






            share|cite|improve this answer









            $endgroup$



            In order to give a short explanation of the mistake :



            In writing $quad 2 int_{0}^{R} 2pi r text{ } dr quad$ you sum elementary areas $quad dA=2pi:r:drquad$



            that is to say, a strip length$=2pi r$ and width$=dr$.



            The hitch is that the width is not $dr$ but is $ds$ (see the figure).



            With a few calculus, you can find $quad ds=frac{R}{sqrt{R^2-r^2}}dr quadtoquad dA=2pi:rfrac{R}{sqrt{R^2-r^2}}dr $



            $$quad 2 int_{0}^{R} 2pi:rfrac{R}{sqrt{R^2-r^2}}dr =4pi R^2$$



            This is a method to find the area of the sphere. Of course, a simpler method consists in doing the job in spherical coordinates instead of Cartesian coordinates.



            enter image description here







            share|cite|improve this answer












            share|cite|improve this answer



            share|cite|improve this answer










            answered Mar 27 '17 at 20:48









            JJacquelinJJacquelin

            44.3k21854




            44.3k21854












            • $begingroup$
              Perfect explanation! Thanks!
              $endgroup$
              – Bruno Reis
              Mar 27 '17 at 23:22


















            • $begingroup$
              Perfect explanation! Thanks!
              $endgroup$
              – Bruno Reis
              Mar 27 '17 at 23:22
















            $begingroup$
            Perfect explanation! Thanks!
            $endgroup$
            – Bruno Reis
            Mar 27 '17 at 23:22




            $begingroup$
            Perfect explanation! Thanks!
            $endgroup$
            – Bruno Reis
            Mar 27 '17 at 23:22











            0












            $begingroup$

            What you are doing is indeed integrating over rings, but then you get the area of a full circle, which was the result of your calculation up to the irrelevant factor of 2.



            You can imagine that by adding more and more dense rings you fill a circle with radius $R$ (the upper limit of your integral).



            But to get the area of a sphere, you need to parametrize all 3 dimensions.
            What you can do is use spherical coordinates, where each point in space is described by a radius $r$, and two angles $theta,phi$ as in the link.



            In fact, to get the area of the sphere you need to keep the radius constant, and integrate over the angles that parametrize the given sphere.



            The result yields



            $$S=int_0^{pi}int_0^{2pi}R^2sintheta dphi dtheta=R^22piint_0^{pi}sintheta dtheta=4pi R^2$$
            as it should be.






            share|cite|improve this answer











            $endgroup$


















              0












              $begingroup$

              What you are doing is indeed integrating over rings, but then you get the area of a full circle, which was the result of your calculation up to the irrelevant factor of 2.



              You can imagine that by adding more and more dense rings you fill a circle with radius $R$ (the upper limit of your integral).



              But to get the area of a sphere, you need to parametrize all 3 dimensions.
              What you can do is use spherical coordinates, where each point in space is described by a radius $r$, and two angles $theta,phi$ as in the link.



              In fact, to get the area of the sphere you need to keep the radius constant, and integrate over the angles that parametrize the given sphere.



              The result yields



              $$S=int_0^{pi}int_0^{2pi}R^2sintheta dphi dtheta=R^22piint_0^{pi}sintheta dtheta=4pi R^2$$
              as it should be.






              share|cite|improve this answer











              $endgroup$
















                0












                0








                0





                $begingroup$

                What you are doing is indeed integrating over rings, but then you get the area of a full circle, which was the result of your calculation up to the irrelevant factor of 2.



                You can imagine that by adding more and more dense rings you fill a circle with radius $R$ (the upper limit of your integral).



                But to get the area of a sphere, you need to parametrize all 3 dimensions.
                What you can do is use spherical coordinates, where each point in space is described by a radius $r$, and two angles $theta,phi$ as in the link.



                In fact, to get the area of the sphere you need to keep the radius constant, and integrate over the angles that parametrize the given sphere.



                The result yields



                $$S=int_0^{pi}int_0^{2pi}R^2sintheta dphi dtheta=R^22piint_0^{pi}sintheta dtheta=4pi R^2$$
                as it should be.






                share|cite|improve this answer











                $endgroup$



                What you are doing is indeed integrating over rings, but then you get the area of a full circle, which was the result of your calculation up to the irrelevant factor of 2.



                You can imagine that by adding more and more dense rings you fill a circle with radius $R$ (the upper limit of your integral).



                But to get the area of a sphere, you need to parametrize all 3 dimensions.
                What you can do is use spherical coordinates, where each point in space is described by a radius $r$, and two angles $theta,phi$ as in the link.



                In fact, to get the area of the sphere you need to keep the radius constant, and integrate over the angles that parametrize the given sphere.



                The result yields



                $$S=int_0^{pi}int_0^{2pi}R^2sintheta dphi dtheta=R^22piint_0^{pi}sintheta dtheta=4pi R^2$$
                as it should be.







                share|cite|improve this answer














                share|cite|improve this answer



                share|cite|improve this answer








                edited Mar 27 '17 at 18:01

























                answered Mar 27 '17 at 17:50









                YoniYoni

                358110




                358110























                    0












                    $begingroup$

                    A) when you pile up the disks you shall pay attention to law with which $r$ varies (with $h$, $x$, $alpha$ $cdots$) otherwise, as already told you do not make any distinction with a cone, a cylinder,..

                    B) adding disks to find volumes is ok, because the volume of the triangular cross-section ring that is left-out is a higher order infinitesimal vs. the volume of the disk; its surface instead is of the same order, and you must consider the hypothenuse instead of the cathetus.






                    share|cite|improve this answer









                    $endgroup$


















                      0












                      $begingroup$

                      A) when you pile up the disks you shall pay attention to law with which $r$ varies (with $h$, $x$, $alpha$ $cdots$) otherwise, as already told you do not make any distinction with a cone, a cylinder,..

                      B) adding disks to find volumes is ok, because the volume of the triangular cross-section ring that is left-out is a higher order infinitesimal vs. the volume of the disk; its surface instead is of the same order, and you must consider the hypothenuse instead of the cathetus.






                      share|cite|improve this answer









                      $endgroup$
















                        0












                        0








                        0





                        $begingroup$

                        A) when you pile up the disks you shall pay attention to law with which $r$ varies (with $h$, $x$, $alpha$ $cdots$) otherwise, as already told you do not make any distinction with a cone, a cylinder,..

                        B) adding disks to find volumes is ok, because the volume of the triangular cross-section ring that is left-out is a higher order infinitesimal vs. the volume of the disk; its surface instead is of the same order, and you must consider the hypothenuse instead of the cathetus.






                        share|cite|improve this answer









                        $endgroup$



                        A) when you pile up the disks you shall pay attention to law with which $r$ varies (with $h$, $x$, $alpha$ $cdots$) otherwise, as already told you do not make any distinction with a cone, a cylinder,..

                        B) adding disks to find volumes is ok, because the volume of the triangular cross-section ring that is left-out is a higher order infinitesimal vs. the volume of the disk; its surface instead is of the same order, and you must consider the hypothenuse instead of the cathetus.







                        share|cite|improve this answer












                        share|cite|improve this answer



                        share|cite|improve this answer










                        answered Mar 27 '17 at 18:12









                        G CabG Cab

                        19.8k31340




                        19.8k31340























                            0












                            $begingroup$

                            $$text{Area will be}~~: 2 int_{0}^{R} 2pi x ~ ds$$



                            Where $ds$ is width of strip bounded by circles of radius $x$ and $x+dx$ situated at height $y$. Also $ds neq dr$ it's tilted in $y$ direction too. Only horizontal projection of $ds$ is $dr$.What you have done is valid for Disk See image below.



                            enter image description here



                            $$(ds)^2=(dx)^2+(dy)^2$$



                            Therefore :
                            $$ds = sqrt{1+Bigg( frac{dy}{dx}Bigg)^2}$$
                            Now,



                            $$x^2 + y^2 = R^2$$
                            $$y = sqrt{R^2 - x^2}$$
                            $$dfrac{dy}{dx} = dfrac{-2x}{2sqrt{R^2 - x^2}}$$
                            $$dfrac{dy}{dx} = dfrac{-x}{sqrt{R^2 - x^2}}$$
                            $$left( dfrac{dy}{dx} right)^2 = dfrac{x^2}{R^2 - x^2}$$



                            Thus,
                            $$displaystyle A = 4pi int_0^R x sqrt{1 + dfrac{x^2}{R^2 - x^2}} , dx$$
                            $$displaystyle A = 4pi int_0^R x sqrt{dfrac{(R^2 - x^2) + x^2}{R^2 - x^2}} , dx$$
                            $$displaystyle A = 4pi int_0^R x sqrt{dfrac{R^2}{R^2 - x^2}} , dx$$



                            Let
                            $$x = R sin θ implies
                            dx = R cos θ dθ$$



                            When $x = 0, θ = 0$
                            When $x = R, θ = pi/2$



                            Thus,
                            $$displaystyle A = 4pi int_0^{pi/2} R sin theta sqrt{dfrac{R^2}{R^2 - R^2 sin^2 theta}} , (R cos theta , dtheta)$$
                            $$displaystyle A = 4pi int_0^{pi/2} R^2 sin theta cos thetasqrt{dfrac{R^2}{R^2(1 - sin^2 theta)}} , dtheta$$
                            $$displaystyle A = 4pi R^2 int_0^{pi/2} sin theta cos thetasqrt{dfrac{1}{cos^2 theta}} , dtheta$$
                            $$displaystyle A = 4pi R^2 int_0^{pi/2} sin theta cos theta left( dfrac{1}{cos theta} right) , dtheta$$
                            $$displaystyle A = 4pi R^2 int_0^{pi/2} sin theta , dtheta$$
                            $$A = 4pi R^2 bigg[-cos theta bigg]_0^{pi/2}$$
                            $$A = 4pi R^2 bigg[-cos frac{1}{2}pi + cos 0 bigg]$$
                            $$A = 4pi R^2 bigg[ -0 + 1 bigg]$$
                            $$A = 4pi R^2$$






                            share|cite|improve this answer











                            $endgroup$


















                              0












                              $begingroup$

                              $$text{Area will be}~~: 2 int_{0}^{R} 2pi x ~ ds$$



                              Where $ds$ is width of strip bounded by circles of radius $x$ and $x+dx$ situated at height $y$. Also $ds neq dr$ it's tilted in $y$ direction too. Only horizontal projection of $ds$ is $dr$.What you have done is valid for Disk See image below.



                              enter image description here



                              $$(ds)^2=(dx)^2+(dy)^2$$



                              Therefore :
                              $$ds = sqrt{1+Bigg( frac{dy}{dx}Bigg)^2}$$
                              Now,



                              $$x^2 + y^2 = R^2$$
                              $$y = sqrt{R^2 - x^2}$$
                              $$dfrac{dy}{dx} = dfrac{-2x}{2sqrt{R^2 - x^2}}$$
                              $$dfrac{dy}{dx} = dfrac{-x}{sqrt{R^2 - x^2}}$$
                              $$left( dfrac{dy}{dx} right)^2 = dfrac{x^2}{R^2 - x^2}$$



                              Thus,
                              $$displaystyle A = 4pi int_0^R x sqrt{1 + dfrac{x^2}{R^2 - x^2}} , dx$$
                              $$displaystyle A = 4pi int_0^R x sqrt{dfrac{(R^2 - x^2) + x^2}{R^2 - x^2}} , dx$$
                              $$displaystyle A = 4pi int_0^R x sqrt{dfrac{R^2}{R^2 - x^2}} , dx$$



                              Let
                              $$x = R sin θ implies
                              dx = R cos θ dθ$$



                              When $x = 0, θ = 0$
                              When $x = R, θ = pi/2$



                              Thus,
                              $$displaystyle A = 4pi int_0^{pi/2} R sin theta sqrt{dfrac{R^2}{R^2 - R^2 sin^2 theta}} , (R cos theta , dtheta)$$
                              $$displaystyle A = 4pi int_0^{pi/2} R^2 sin theta cos thetasqrt{dfrac{R^2}{R^2(1 - sin^2 theta)}} , dtheta$$
                              $$displaystyle A = 4pi R^2 int_0^{pi/2} sin theta cos thetasqrt{dfrac{1}{cos^2 theta}} , dtheta$$
                              $$displaystyle A = 4pi R^2 int_0^{pi/2} sin theta cos theta left( dfrac{1}{cos theta} right) , dtheta$$
                              $$displaystyle A = 4pi R^2 int_0^{pi/2} sin theta , dtheta$$
                              $$A = 4pi R^2 bigg[-cos theta bigg]_0^{pi/2}$$
                              $$A = 4pi R^2 bigg[-cos frac{1}{2}pi + cos 0 bigg]$$
                              $$A = 4pi R^2 bigg[ -0 + 1 bigg]$$
                              $$A = 4pi R^2$$






                              share|cite|improve this answer











                              $endgroup$
















                                0












                                0








                                0





                                $begingroup$

                                $$text{Area will be}~~: 2 int_{0}^{R} 2pi x ~ ds$$



                                Where $ds$ is width of strip bounded by circles of radius $x$ and $x+dx$ situated at height $y$. Also $ds neq dr$ it's tilted in $y$ direction too. Only horizontal projection of $ds$ is $dr$.What you have done is valid for Disk See image below.



                                enter image description here



                                $$(ds)^2=(dx)^2+(dy)^2$$



                                Therefore :
                                $$ds = sqrt{1+Bigg( frac{dy}{dx}Bigg)^2}$$
                                Now,



                                $$x^2 + y^2 = R^2$$
                                $$y = sqrt{R^2 - x^2}$$
                                $$dfrac{dy}{dx} = dfrac{-2x}{2sqrt{R^2 - x^2}}$$
                                $$dfrac{dy}{dx} = dfrac{-x}{sqrt{R^2 - x^2}}$$
                                $$left( dfrac{dy}{dx} right)^2 = dfrac{x^2}{R^2 - x^2}$$



                                Thus,
                                $$displaystyle A = 4pi int_0^R x sqrt{1 + dfrac{x^2}{R^2 - x^2}} , dx$$
                                $$displaystyle A = 4pi int_0^R x sqrt{dfrac{(R^2 - x^2) + x^2}{R^2 - x^2}} , dx$$
                                $$displaystyle A = 4pi int_0^R x sqrt{dfrac{R^2}{R^2 - x^2}} , dx$$



                                Let
                                $$x = R sin θ implies
                                dx = R cos θ dθ$$



                                When $x = 0, θ = 0$
                                When $x = R, θ = pi/2$



                                Thus,
                                $$displaystyle A = 4pi int_0^{pi/2} R sin theta sqrt{dfrac{R^2}{R^2 - R^2 sin^2 theta}} , (R cos theta , dtheta)$$
                                $$displaystyle A = 4pi int_0^{pi/2} R^2 sin theta cos thetasqrt{dfrac{R^2}{R^2(1 - sin^2 theta)}} , dtheta$$
                                $$displaystyle A = 4pi R^2 int_0^{pi/2} sin theta cos thetasqrt{dfrac{1}{cos^2 theta}} , dtheta$$
                                $$displaystyle A = 4pi R^2 int_0^{pi/2} sin theta cos theta left( dfrac{1}{cos theta} right) , dtheta$$
                                $$displaystyle A = 4pi R^2 int_0^{pi/2} sin theta , dtheta$$
                                $$A = 4pi R^2 bigg[-cos theta bigg]_0^{pi/2}$$
                                $$A = 4pi R^2 bigg[-cos frac{1}{2}pi + cos 0 bigg]$$
                                $$A = 4pi R^2 bigg[ -0 + 1 bigg]$$
                                $$A = 4pi R^2$$






                                share|cite|improve this answer











                                $endgroup$



                                $$text{Area will be}~~: 2 int_{0}^{R} 2pi x ~ ds$$



                                Where $ds$ is width of strip bounded by circles of radius $x$ and $x+dx$ situated at height $y$. Also $ds neq dr$ it's tilted in $y$ direction too. Only horizontal projection of $ds$ is $dr$.What you have done is valid for Disk See image below.



                                enter image description here



                                $$(ds)^2=(dx)^2+(dy)^2$$



                                Therefore :
                                $$ds = sqrt{1+Bigg( frac{dy}{dx}Bigg)^2}$$
                                Now,



                                $$x^2 + y^2 = R^2$$
                                $$y = sqrt{R^2 - x^2}$$
                                $$dfrac{dy}{dx} = dfrac{-2x}{2sqrt{R^2 - x^2}}$$
                                $$dfrac{dy}{dx} = dfrac{-x}{sqrt{R^2 - x^2}}$$
                                $$left( dfrac{dy}{dx} right)^2 = dfrac{x^2}{R^2 - x^2}$$



                                Thus,
                                $$displaystyle A = 4pi int_0^R x sqrt{1 + dfrac{x^2}{R^2 - x^2}} , dx$$
                                $$displaystyle A = 4pi int_0^R x sqrt{dfrac{(R^2 - x^2) + x^2}{R^2 - x^2}} , dx$$
                                $$displaystyle A = 4pi int_0^R x sqrt{dfrac{R^2}{R^2 - x^2}} , dx$$



                                Let
                                $$x = R sin θ implies
                                dx = R cos θ dθ$$



                                When $x = 0, θ = 0$
                                When $x = R, θ = pi/2$



                                Thus,
                                $$displaystyle A = 4pi int_0^{pi/2} R sin theta sqrt{dfrac{R^2}{R^2 - R^2 sin^2 theta}} , (R cos theta , dtheta)$$
                                $$displaystyle A = 4pi int_0^{pi/2} R^2 sin theta cos thetasqrt{dfrac{R^2}{R^2(1 - sin^2 theta)}} , dtheta$$
                                $$displaystyle A = 4pi R^2 int_0^{pi/2} sin theta cos thetasqrt{dfrac{1}{cos^2 theta}} , dtheta$$
                                $$displaystyle A = 4pi R^2 int_0^{pi/2} sin theta cos theta left( dfrac{1}{cos theta} right) , dtheta$$
                                $$displaystyle A = 4pi R^2 int_0^{pi/2} sin theta , dtheta$$
                                $$A = 4pi R^2 bigg[-cos theta bigg]_0^{pi/2}$$
                                $$A = 4pi R^2 bigg[-cos frac{1}{2}pi + cos 0 bigg]$$
                                $$A = 4pi R^2 bigg[ -0 + 1 bigg]$$
                                $$A = 4pi R^2$$







                                share|cite|improve this answer














                                share|cite|improve this answer



                                share|cite|improve this answer








                                edited Mar 27 '17 at 18:13

























                                answered Mar 27 '17 at 17:53









                                Jaideep KhareJaideep Khare

                                17.8k32669




                                17.8k32669























                                    0












                                    $begingroup$

                                    If you consider a formula like



                                    $$ dA = 2 pi r , dr$$



                                    for a cylinder, it is zero and so fails.



                                    If you consider a formula for a cylinder,



                                    $$ dA = 2 pi r , dz$$



                                    it seems to be correct.



                                    However, for a cone $dz=0$ so even this formula fails.



                                    Intuition says $dr,dz$ should both be involved.



                                    In fact if you recall cone formula $ A = pi,r, s = 2 pi, bar {r} , s ,, dA= 2pi r ds $



                                    slant generator is correct in principle.



                                    We have cone differential area



                                    $$ dA = 2 pi r ds = 2 pi r sqrt{dr^2+dz^2 } $$



                                    and that should be considered in integration of all surfaces of revolution.






                                    share|cite|improve this answer









                                    $endgroup$


















                                      0












                                      $begingroup$

                                      If you consider a formula like



                                      $$ dA = 2 pi r , dr$$



                                      for a cylinder, it is zero and so fails.



                                      If you consider a formula for a cylinder,



                                      $$ dA = 2 pi r , dz$$



                                      it seems to be correct.



                                      However, for a cone $dz=0$ so even this formula fails.



                                      Intuition says $dr,dz$ should both be involved.



                                      In fact if you recall cone formula $ A = pi,r, s = 2 pi, bar {r} , s ,, dA= 2pi r ds $



                                      slant generator is correct in principle.



                                      We have cone differential area



                                      $$ dA = 2 pi r ds = 2 pi r sqrt{dr^2+dz^2 } $$



                                      and that should be considered in integration of all surfaces of revolution.






                                      share|cite|improve this answer









                                      $endgroup$
















                                        0












                                        0








                                        0





                                        $begingroup$

                                        If you consider a formula like



                                        $$ dA = 2 pi r , dr$$



                                        for a cylinder, it is zero and so fails.



                                        If you consider a formula for a cylinder,



                                        $$ dA = 2 pi r , dz$$



                                        it seems to be correct.



                                        However, for a cone $dz=0$ so even this formula fails.



                                        Intuition says $dr,dz$ should both be involved.



                                        In fact if you recall cone formula $ A = pi,r, s = 2 pi, bar {r} , s ,, dA= 2pi r ds $



                                        slant generator is correct in principle.



                                        We have cone differential area



                                        $$ dA = 2 pi r ds = 2 pi r sqrt{dr^2+dz^2 } $$



                                        and that should be considered in integration of all surfaces of revolution.






                                        share|cite|improve this answer









                                        $endgroup$



                                        If you consider a formula like



                                        $$ dA = 2 pi r , dr$$



                                        for a cylinder, it is zero and so fails.



                                        If you consider a formula for a cylinder,



                                        $$ dA = 2 pi r , dz$$



                                        it seems to be correct.



                                        However, for a cone $dz=0$ so even this formula fails.



                                        Intuition says $dr,dz$ should both be involved.



                                        In fact if you recall cone formula $ A = pi,r, s = 2 pi, bar {r} , s ,, dA= 2pi r ds $



                                        slant generator is correct in principle.



                                        We have cone differential area



                                        $$ dA = 2 pi r ds = 2 pi r sqrt{dr^2+dz^2 } $$



                                        and that should be considered in integration of all surfaces of revolution.







                                        share|cite|improve this answer












                                        share|cite|improve this answer



                                        share|cite|improve this answer










                                        answered Mar 27 '17 at 18:34









                                        NarasimhamNarasimham

                                        20.9k62158




                                        20.9k62158























                                            0












                                            $begingroup$

                                            There are two problems here.



                                            First: Not only do your disks change radius from the apex to the base of the hemisphere, but they do so at a varying rate. Let's say (for concreteness) that the sphere is $x^2 + y^2 + z^2 = R^2$, and we're dividing the sphere into disks based on the $x$-coordinate. If you try to approximate the surface area of a hemisphere of radius $R=1$ by slicing it into disks of radius (say) $0.1, 0.2, ldots, 0.9, 1$, you'll find that the first few small-radius slices are very close together— to be precise, at $x = sqrt{1 - 0.1^2} = 0.994$, $sqrt{1-0.2^2} = 0.980$, $sqrt{1-0.3^2} = 0.954$, and so forth—but the larger slices are much farther apart. If you use the surface areas of these disks to calculate the surface area of the sphere, you have to take into account the fact that the disks have different widths.



                                            Going from finite to infinitesimal width: The radius of a disk at $x$ is $r = sqrt{R^2-x^2}$ (the inverse of this formula is $x = sqrt{R^2 - r^2}$), so if you make cuts in the sphere each time the radius changes by $dr$, then the slices will have width $-dx = -dr dfrac{dx}{dr} = dfrac{r}{sqrt{R^2-r^2}}, dr$ (the negative sign corrects for the fact that $x$ increases with decreasing $r$).



                                            Second: The surfaces of the sphere slices that we discuss above have sloping cross-sections (in the $xy$ plane or any plane that includes the $x$-axis), whereas cylinders have flat surface cross-sections. You can ignore the difference this makes for calculating volume, but not for surface area; otherwise you can prove that $pi = 4$. So you need to make another correction: the width of the surface of a disk isn't $dx$ but rather $sqrt{(dx)^2 + (dr)^2} = sqrt{ dfrac{r^2}{R^2 - r^2} + 1}, dr = dfrac{R}{sqrt{R^2 - r^2}}, dr$. Putting this all together and integrating over $r$ (though $x$ would be nicer): The integral that you actually have to do is thus $$begin{align*} &int_0^R (2pi r) frac{R}{sqrt{R^2 - r^2}}, dr \
                                            =& ;2pi R int_{r=0}^{r=R} frac{-du/2}{sqrt{u}} tag{$u = R^2 - r^2$; $du = -2r, dr$} \
                                            =& -2pi R left. sqrt{u} right|_{r=0}^{r=R} \
                                            =& -2pi R left. sqrt{R^2 - r^2}right|_{r=0}^{r=R} \
                                            =&;2pi R^2
                                            end{align*}$$

                                            and this is the result you want.






                                            share|cite|improve this answer











                                            $endgroup$


















                                              0












                                              $begingroup$

                                              There are two problems here.



                                              First: Not only do your disks change radius from the apex to the base of the hemisphere, but they do so at a varying rate. Let's say (for concreteness) that the sphere is $x^2 + y^2 + z^2 = R^2$, and we're dividing the sphere into disks based on the $x$-coordinate. If you try to approximate the surface area of a hemisphere of radius $R=1$ by slicing it into disks of radius (say) $0.1, 0.2, ldots, 0.9, 1$, you'll find that the first few small-radius slices are very close together— to be precise, at $x = sqrt{1 - 0.1^2} = 0.994$, $sqrt{1-0.2^2} = 0.980$, $sqrt{1-0.3^2} = 0.954$, and so forth—but the larger slices are much farther apart. If you use the surface areas of these disks to calculate the surface area of the sphere, you have to take into account the fact that the disks have different widths.



                                              Going from finite to infinitesimal width: The radius of a disk at $x$ is $r = sqrt{R^2-x^2}$ (the inverse of this formula is $x = sqrt{R^2 - r^2}$), so if you make cuts in the sphere each time the radius changes by $dr$, then the slices will have width $-dx = -dr dfrac{dx}{dr} = dfrac{r}{sqrt{R^2-r^2}}, dr$ (the negative sign corrects for the fact that $x$ increases with decreasing $r$).



                                              Second: The surfaces of the sphere slices that we discuss above have sloping cross-sections (in the $xy$ plane or any plane that includes the $x$-axis), whereas cylinders have flat surface cross-sections. You can ignore the difference this makes for calculating volume, but not for surface area; otherwise you can prove that $pi = 4$. So you need to make another correction: the width of the surface of a disk isn't $dx$ but rather $sqrt{(dx)^2 + (dr)^2} = sqrt{ dfrac{r^2}{R^2 - r^2} + 1}, dr = dfrac{R}{sqrt{R^2 - r^2}}, dr$. Putting this all together and integrating over $r$ (though $x$ would be nicer): The integral that you actually have to do is thus $$begin{align*} &int_0^R (2pi r) frac{R}{sqrt{R^2 - r^2}}, dr \
                                              =& ;2pi R int_{r=0}^{r=R} frac{-du/2}{sqrt{u}} tag{$u = R^2 - r^2$; $du = -2r, dr$} \
                                              =& -2pi R left. sqrt{u} right|_{r=0}^{r=R} \
                                              =& -2pi R left. sqrt{R^2 - r^2}right|_{r=0}^{r=R} \
                                              =&;2pi R^2
                                              end{align*}$$

                                              and this is the result you want.






                                              share|cite|improve this answer











                                              $endgroup$
















                                                0












                                                0








                                                0





                                                $begingroup$

                                                There are two problems here.



                                                First: Not only do your disks change radius from the apex to the base of the hemisphere, but they do so at a varying rate. Let's say (for concreteness) that the sphere is $x^2 + y^2 + z^2 = R^2$, and we're dividing the sphere into disks based on the $x$-coordinate. If you try to approximate the surface area of a hemisphere of radius $R=1$ by slicing it into disks of radius (say) $0.1, 0.2, ldots, 0.9, 1$, you'll find that the first few small-radius slices are very close together— to be precise, at $x = sqrt{1 - 0.1^2} = 0.994$, $sqrt{1-0.2^2} = 0.980$, $sqrt{1-0.3^2} = 0.954$, and so forth—but the larger slices are much farther apart. If you use the surface areas of these disks to calculate the surface area of the sphere, you have to take into account the fact that the disks have different widths.



                                                Going from finite to infinitesimal width: The radius of a disk at $x$ is $r = sqrt{R^2-x^2}$ (the inverse of this formula is $x = sqrt{R^2 - r^2}$), so if you make cuts in the sphere each time the radius changes by $dr$, then the slices will have width $-dx = -dr dfrac{dx}{dr} = dfrac{r}{sqrt{R^2-r^2}}, dr$ (the negative sign corrects for the fact that $x$ increases with decreasing $r$).



                                                Second: The surfaces of the sphere slices that we discuss above have sloping cross-sections (in the $xy$ plane or any plane that includes the $x$-axis), whereas cylinders have flat surface cross-sections. You can ignore the difference this makes for calculating volume, but not for surface area; otherwise you can prove that $pi = 4$. So you need to make another correction: the width of the surface of a disk isn't $dx$ but rather $sqrt{(dx)^2 + (dr)^2} = sqrt{ dfrac{r^2}{R^2 - r^2} + 1}, dr = dfrac{R}{sqrt{R^2 - r^2}}, dr$. Putting this all together and integrating over $r$ (though $x$ would be nicer): The integral that you actually have to do is thus $$begin{align*} &int_0^R (2pi r) frac{R}{sqrt{R^2 - r^2}}, dr \
                                                =& ;2pi R int_{r=0}^{r=R} frac{-du/2}{sqrt{u}} tag{$u = R^2 - r^2$; $du = -2r, dr$} \
                                                =& -2pi R left. sqrt{u} right|_{r=0}^{r=R} \
                                                =& -2pi R left. sqrt{R^2 - r^2}right|_{r=0}^{r=R} \
                                                =&;2pi R^2
                                                end{align*}$$

                                                and this is the result you want.






                                                share|cite|improve this answer











                                                $endgroup$



                                                There are two problems here.



                                                First: Not only do your disks change radius from the apex to the base of the hemisphere, but they do so at a varying rate. Let's say (for concreteness) that the sphere is $x^2 + y^2 + z^2 = R^2$, and we're dividing the sphere into disks based on the $x$-coordinate. If you try to approximate the surface area of a hemisphere of radius $R=1$ by slicing it into disks of radius (say) $0.1, 0.2, ldots, 0.9, 1$, you'll find that the first few small-radius slices are very close together— to be precise, at $x = sqrt{1 - 0.1^2} = 0.994$, $sqrt{1-0.2^2} = 0.980$, $sqrt{1-0.3^2} = 0.954$, and so forth—but the larger slices are much farther apart. If you use the surface areas of these disks to calculate the surface area of the sphere, you have to take into account the fact that the disks have different widths.



                                                Going from finite to infinitesimal width: The radius of a disk at $x$ is $r = sqrt{R^2-x^2}$ (the inverse of this formula is $x = sqrt{R^2 - r^2}$), so if you make cuts in the sphere each time the radius changes by $dr$, then the slices will have width $-dx = -dr dfrac{dx}{dr} = dfrac{r}{sqrt{R^2-r^2}}, dr$ (the negative sign corrects for the fact that $x$ increases with decreasing $r$).



                                                Second: The surfaces of the sphere slices that we discuss above have sloping cross-sections (in the $xy$ plane or any plane that includes the $x$-axis), whereas cylinders have flat surface cross-sections. You can ignore the difference this makes for calculating volume, but not for surface area; otherwise you can prove that $pi = 4$. So you need to make another correction: the width of the surface of a disk isn't $dx$ but rather $sqrt{(dx)^2 + (dr)^2} = sqrt{ dfrac{r^2}{R^2 - r^2} + 1}, dr = dfrac{R}{sqrt{R^2 - r^2}}, dr$. Putting this all together and integrating over $r$ (though $x$ would be nicer): The integral that you actually have to do is thus $$begin{align*} &int_0^R (2pi r) frac{R}{sqrt{R^2 - r^2}}, dr \
                                                =& ;2pi R int_{r=0}^{r=R} frac{-du/2}{sqrt{u}} tag{$u = R^2 - r^2$; $du = -2r, dr$} \
                                                =& -2pi R left. sqrt{u} right|_{r=0}^{r=R} \
                                                =& -2pi R left. sqrt{R^2 - r^2}right|_{r=0}^{r=R} \
                                                =&;2pi R^2
                                                end{align*}$$

                                                and this is the result you want.







                                                share|cite|improve this answer














                                                share|cite|improve this answer



                                                share|cite|improve this answer








                                                edited Jan 2 at 12:06









                                                TonyF

                                                32




                                                32










                                                answered Mar 27 '17 at 18:42









                                                Connor HarrisConnor Harris

                                                4,430724




                                                4,430724






























                                                    draft saved

                                                    draft discarded




















































                                                    Thanks for contributing an answer to Mathematics Stack Exchange!


                                                    • Please be sure to answer the question. Provide details and share your research!

                                                    But avoid



                                                    • Asking for help, clarification, or responding to other answers.

                                                    • Making statements based on opinion; back them up with references or personal experience.


                                                    Use MathJax to format equations. MathJax reference.


                                                    To learn more, see our tips on writing great answers.




                                                    draft saved


                                                    draft discarded














                                                    StackExchange.ready(
                                                    function () {
                                                    StackExchange.openid.initPostLogin('.new-post-login', 'https%3a%2f%2fmath.stackexchange.com%2fquestions%2f2205612%2fsurface-area-of-a-sphere-with-integration-of-disks%23new-answer', 'question_page');
                                                    }
                                                    );

                                                    Post as a guest















                                                    Required, but never shown





















































                                                    Required, but never shown














                                                    Required, but never shown












                                                    Required, but never shown







                                                    Required, but never shown

































                                                    Required, but never shown














                                                    Required, but never shown












                                                    Required, but never shown







                                                    Required, but never shown







                                                    Popular posts from this blog

                                                    Bressuire

                                                    Cabo Verde

                                                    Gyllenstierna