Past exam of the mathematical methods II course of the University of Oxford / 2021 resit / 8 / a / Solution

For a continuously differentiable vector field $\mathbf{F}$ on a neighborhood of an oriented, piecewise smooth surface $S$, Stokes theorem statesHere $\partial S$ is the boundary curve, $d\mathbf{r}$ is its directed tangent element, $\hat{\mathbf{n}}$ is the chosen unit normal vector, $dS$ is the surface area element, and $\nabla \times \mathbf{F}$ is the curl. The right-hand rule relates the boundary direction to $\hat{\mathbf{n}}$. Thus circulation around the edge equals the flux of curl through the spanning surface. Reversing both orientations changes both signs. One can replace a difficult line integral by an easier surface integral, or replace one spanning surface by another within the region of regularity.

For a bounded volume $V$ with piecewise smooth closed boundary and a continuously differentiable vector field on a neighborhood of its closure, the divergence theorem statesHere ${\hat{\mathbf{n}}}_{\mathrm{out}}$ points out of $V$, including into any holes, $dV$ is the volume element, and $\nabla \cdot \mathbf{F}$ is the divergence. It equates total outward flux to integrated source strength. It converts a closed surface integral into a volume integral, and explains why internal fluxes cancel in a subdivided region. Singularities cannot be included without checking the hypotheses.

For a conservative force, the work around every closed path is zero. Stokes theorem gives zero flux of curl through every sufficiently small patch. Dividing by its area and shrinking the patch shows that every component of the continuous curl vanishes:Here $U$ is potential energy; conversely, zero curl implies a conservative vector field on a simply connected domain. The divergence theorem then gives the compatible relation ${\iint }_{\partial V}\mathbf{F}\cdot \hat{\mathbf{n}}dS=-{\iiint }_V{\nabla }^{2}UdV$. There is no general zero-divergence condition on a conservative force: $\mathbf{F}=-\mathbf{r}=-\nabla (r^2/2)$ is a concrete counterexample, with $\nabla \cdot \mathbf{F}=-3$.