NARROW DISPLAY WARNING
You are most likely using a tablet or mobile device in portrait orientation. This website is best viewed using a typical computer screen with the browser window maximized.
Viewing this website in portrait orientation can cause problems with equations being longer than the screen width (you can scroll to the right), images being poorly sized, and the font size of maths text being much smaller than regular text. If your only option is a tablet or mobile device, your viewing experience will be better if you view this website in landscape orientation. You might need to refresh the page to fix any problems after rotating.
Double integrals in polar coordinates are useful for integrating over radially symmetric regions in the
Going back to
Part of the problem is the double integral doesn't know anything about what coordinate system is being used. The literal interpretation of every double integral is summing over little rectangles. The goal is to integrate over the region
The method to calculate the scaling factor in general uses the Jacobian, but the scaling factor for
The area of one of the wedges on the left with side length
That's the area of the entire ring, but the wedge is only a fraction
Taking the limit as the wedge shrinks toward the center point
So the change of variables from Cartesian to polar needs a scaling factor of
Interpreting the integral over the region
The volume of the solid on the right can be calculated using geometry with the area of the trapezoid the base length times the average of the two side heights.
And the volumes are equal!
The previous derivation is dependent on
An example is the volume under a cone over a region R bounded by
One choice for the
Because of this, the double integral in polar coordinates with these bounds evaluates to zero.
The volume under the cone is definitely not zero, so this is wrong. This could be fixed by being careful and using absolute values, but it's a mess and not worth the effort. Much better to change the bounds on the
A better choice for the
Now the volume evaluates to something reasonable.
We can compare to another volume that is easy to calculate that will be approximately equal. Instead of the volume under cone, we can calculate the volume under a plane
This can be calculated without an integral because we know the formula for the volume of a cylinder, and this cylinder with radius
The two results are fairly close.
Find the volume under the cone
This is the example from the explanation section above.
Find the volume under the plane
This is the example from the explanation section above.
Find the volume of the paraboloid
Find the area of one petal of the rose curve
Find the area of the cardioid
Find the area of the limacon