Frühere | Chronologischer Index | Spätere | ||
Vorherige | Thematischer Index | Nächste |
Guten Tag allerseits, zur Kenntnis eine Korrespondenz mit support. Mit freundlichen Grüssen Hans Dolhaine _________________________________ VTR-TS Phone: +49-211-797-4809 Fax: +49-211-798-1853 Mobile: 0171 97 17 049 E-Mail: Hans.Dolhaine@XXXXXXX.com ----- Weitergeleitet von Hans Dolhaine/KGaA/HENKEL am 22.10.2003 14:23 ----- support@wolfram.c om An: Hans.Dolhaine@XXXXXXX.com 16.10.2003 05:30 Kopie: Entscheidung Thema: [TS 23099]--Re:integrals erforderlich ? |--------| | [ ] ja | |--------| -- Wolfram Research Technical Support -- This is a response to your email. The reply to your question can be found at the bottom of this message. Our classification number for this message is: [TS 23099] Please give this number in any future correspondence related to this question. If you leave this number in the Subject: header in the form [TS 23099], it will automatically be reassigned to the original technician. From: Hans.Dolhaine@XXXXXXX.com Date: Wed, 15 Oct 2003 11:28:20 +0100 Subject: integrals To: support@XXXXXXX.com hello to you, I encountered a problem which may be a bug, but I'm not quite sure. Gauss states, that integrals over surfaces may be transfomed to integrals over volumes according to surfaceintegral [ a . dS ] = volumeintegral [ div . a dV ] Please have a look at the attached notebook. I have a vector aa whose divergence simplifies to 1/r, so the volumeintegral (over the whole sphere) is rather simple). Trying to do the surfaceintegral yields a result which is quite different. When I try numerical integration I get a warning that the integrand(s) is (are) singlular at some points and no evaluation takes place. That is ok. But the symbolic integration, if the sequence of doing the integrals is chosen appropriately, gives without any complaints some values. Generally I trust these, but this seems to be a bug: no reference to the possible singularities is given and the final result is totally different from the volumeintegral. Is this a bug or have I overlooked something? Kind regards Hans Dolhaine (See attached file: support.nb) _________________________________ VTR-TS Phone: +49-211-797-4809 Fax: +49-211-798-1853 Mobile: 0171 97 17 049 E-Mail: Hans.Dolhaine@XXXXXXX.com ======================================================= Hello, Thank you for taking the time to send us this report. You are correct that some of the results from Integrate in your example are wrong. In particular, the result from each of the last three Integrate examples in the notebook that was included with your message should be 2Pi/3. This can be verified using numerical integration. In[]:= 2 Pi NIntegrate[Evaluate[i1[[1]] /. R -> 1], {t, 0, Pi/2, Pi}, SingularityDepth -> 999] Out[]= 2.0944 In[]:= NIntegrate[Evaluate[i1[[2]] /. R -> 1], {p, 0, Pi, 2 Pi}, {t, 0, Pi/2, Pi}] Out[]= 2.0944 In[]:= NIntegrate[Evaluate[i1[[3]] /. R -> 1], {p, 0, 3, 2 Pi}, {t, 0, Pi/2, Pi}] Out[]= 2.0944 The behavior of these examples in the current version of Mathematica (Version 5.0) has changed, but remains incorrect. I have filed these examples so that this behavior can be investigated. I have not reviewed the mathematics or the analysis that you described, and do not know if that analysis is correct. Unfortunately, there are no known workarounds for this error in the Integrate function. We apologize for any difficulties caused by this error. Technical Support Wolfram Research ---------------------------------------------------------------------------- If this issue is resolved, please consider taking a few minutes to give us some feedback on your experience. Please visit http://support.wolfram.com/survey/?trackingnumber=23099 and give your honest answers to these three short questions. Thanks for taking the time to help us improve.
<<attachment: support.nb>>
Frühere | Chronologischer Index | Spätere | ||
Vorherige | Thematischer Index | Nächste |
DMUG-Archiv, http://www.mathematica.ch/archiv.html