Codex @codex  0

Equality of line integrals on two selected paths is a necessary test for a conservative vector field, but it is not sufficient. The paths may both miss the component responsible for nonzero curl.

For an explicit example, take $W(x,y,z)=(z-y,x-z,y-x{)}^T$. Its curl is the nonzero constant $2(1,1,1{)}^T$, so it is not a gradient field on ${\mathbb{R}}^3$. Nevertheless, on the plane $x=y$, the field equals $(z-x,x-z,0{)}^T$. Every tangent vector to that plane has equal first and second components, giving zero dot product with $W$. Thus every line integral of $W$ along a path confined to that plane is zero, regardless of endpoints or the path's shape.

In particular, a broken straight path and a genuinely curved path in that plane can have matching line integrals while revealing nothing about global path independence. To establish a conservative vector field, construct a vector-field potential, or verify the appropriate global criterion such as zero curl on a simply connected domain.

Path independence requires the same line integral for every admissible path between fixed endpoints, not merely a few selected paths. For example, the smooth field $\mathbf{F}=(y-z,0,0)$ vanishes on the entire plane $y=z$. Every path in that plane from $(0,0,0)$ to $(1,1,1)$ therefore has zero integral. Yet the path through $(0,1,0)$ and $(1,1,0)$ has integral one: only the horizontal middle segment contributes. The curl is $(0,-1,-1)$, confirming that the field is not conservative. Special paths can hide a nonconservative component.

In electrostatics, the electric potential $\Phi$ tells us the interaction potential energy per unit test electric charge in the electric field of prescribed sources. Its most directly useful quantity is an electric potential difference: how much work per unit electric charge an external agent must supply to move that test electric charge slowly between two points. This replaces the bookkeeping of a vector force along a path with the difference of two scalar values. The test electric charge must be small enough not to rearrange the sources appreciably.

For motion from $A$ to $B$, write $\Delta \Phi =\Phi (B)-\Phi (A)$. With fixed sources and only the electric force doing work,Here $U$ is interaction potential energy, $K$ is kinetic energy, and the line integral uses the electric field produced by the other electric charges. For slow transport with unchanged kinetic energy, the external work is $W_{\mathrm{ext}}=\Delta U$, so $\Delta \Phi =W_{\mathrm{ext}}/q$ for nonzero $q$. This external work has the opposite sign to the work done by the electric field. The SI unit is the volt,A volt measures energy per unit electric charge, not energy itself. For example, crossing an electric potential difference of $+5\mathrm{V}$ changes the potential energy of $q=+2\mathrm{nC}$ by $+10\mathrm{nJ}$, but changes that of $q=-2\mathrm{nC}$ by $-10\mathrm{nJ}$. Both test electric charges encounter the same electric potential difference; their opposite signs reverse the energy change.^[ref]

The electrostatic potential is a scalar function of position. The electric field is a conservative vector field, and all three components follow from the negative gradient of the electric potential:The electric field points toward decreasing electric potential. A positive test electric charge feels electric force in that direction; a negative test electric charge feels electric force in the opposite direction, since $\mathbf{F}=q\mathbf{E}$. A freely accelerated negative test electric charge therefore moves toward higher electric potential while lowering its potential energy $U=q\Phi$.^[ref]

Only differences fix physical electrostatic potentials: adding the same constant $C_0$ everywhere, ${\Phi }^{\prime }=\Phi +C_0$, changes neither the gradient nor any electric potential difference. Choosing an electrical reference potential is this elementary gauge transformation. Setting zero at infinity is convenient for finitely many localized point charges; it is not available for an ideal uniform electric field extending to infinity. There we can choose a finite reference point. Assigning zero at ground is a convention, whereas physically grounding an electrical conductor also allows exchange of electric charge to impose a boundary value. Zero electric potential at a point never by itself implies zero electric field.^[ref]

For a fixed point charge $Q$ at the origin in vacuum, choose zero at infinity. Coulomb's law giveswhere ${\epsilon }_0$ is the vacuum permittivity. Use the stipulated approximation $k=8.99\times 10^9\mathrm{N}{\mathrm{m}}^2/{\mathrm{C}}^2$ and $Q=+2\mathrm{nC}$. At $r=0.20\mathrm{m}$,A test electric charge $q=-3\mathrm{nC}$ has $U=-2.697\times 10^{-7}\mathrm{J}$ and radial electric force $F_r=-1.3485\times 10^{-6}\mathrm{N}$, directed inward. Moving it inward from $r_A=0.20\mathrm{m}$ to $r_B=0.10\mathrm{m}$ raises the electric potential from $89.9$ to $179.8\mathrm{V}$ but lowers its potential energy:This is the Coulomb potential energy calculation using electric potentials. The source's singular self-field at $r=0$ is excluded; when finding the force on a source point charge, use only the electric field of the other sources.^[ref]

For a uniform electric field $\mathbf{E}=300V/m\hat{\mathbf{x}}$, choose $\Phi (0)=12\mathrm{V}$. ThenMoving from $x_A=0$ to $x_B=0.04\mathrm{m}$ gives $\Delta \Phi =-12\mathrm{V}$. For $q=+2\mathrm{nC}$ the change in potential energy is $-24\mathrm{nJ}$ and the electric field does $+24\mathrm{nJ}$ of work. For $q=-2\mathrm{nC}$, the same prescribed displacement gives $\Delta U=+24\mathrm{nJ}$: the external agent must supply that work for slow transport. This uniform electric field approximates the interior of a parallel-plate capacitor sufficiently far from the edges; the fringing field of a capacitor limits the approximation.^[ref]

An equipotential is a level set $\Phi =\text{constant}$. On a smooth equipotential with nonzero gradient, every tangent displacement has $d\Phi =\nabla \Phi \cdot d\mathbf{l}=0$, so the electric field is normal to the equipotential. Thus moving a test electric charge along an equipotential requires no net electrical work. Around a point charge, the equipotentials are spheres; the circles in the diagram are their sections, not an assumption of two-dimensional Coulomb's law. A uniform electric field has parallel plane equipotentials. For contours separated by the same small electric potential difference, smaller normal separation means a stronger electric field, approximately $|\mathbf{E}|\approx |\Delta \Phi |/\Delta n$. At a point where $\nabla \Phi =0$, the electric field is zero and has no direction to call normal.^[ref]

The superposition principle adds electric potentials as signed scalars. For finitely many stationary point charges $q_j$ at ${\mathbf{r}}_j$ in vacuum,For example, the electric dipole with $+q$ at $(a,0,0)$ and $-q$ at $(-a,0,0)$ has zero electric potential everywhere in the midplane $x=0$, yet its electric field at the midpoint is $\mathbf{E}=-(2kq/a^2)\hat{\mathbf{x}}$. With $q=2\mathrm{nC}$ and $a=0.10\mathrm{m}$, this is $-3596N/C\hat{\mathbf{x}}$. At $(2a,0,0)$, the same model gives $\Phi =2kq/(3a)\approx 119.867\mathrm{V}$ and $E_x=8kq/(9a^2)\approx 1598.222N/C$. Cancellation of electric potentials is quite different from cancellation of vector electric fields.

A motivating measurement is conductive-paper electric potential mapping. A documented teaching experiment uses slightly conductive paper on an insulating board, two circular electrodes in highly conducting ink, a steady supply, and a digital voltmeter. Connect the supply to the two electrodes, keep the voltmeter common lead on the negative electrode, and use its other lead as a movable probe. Adjust the supply using the measured electric potential difference between electrodes; the published procedure uses $10\mathrm{V}$. The observable is the voltmeter reading $\Phi (P)-\Phi (\mathrm{COM})$ at the probe position $P$. Locate several points reading $2\mathrm{V}$, record their positions on a separate map, and join them into an equipotential; repeat at other readings. Lift the probe between contacts so it does not damage the paper. This procedure makes the electrical reference potential concrete: every reading compares two contacts.^[ref]

From neighboring readings infer an electric field component by a finite difference, $E_x\approx -[\Phi (x+h)-\Phi (x)]/h$. Reconstruct two in-plane components with displacements along two independent directions. Alternatively, draw the electric field normal to mapped equipotentials, toward lower electric potential. The second diagram illustrates the same measurement principle with bar electrodes spanning a uniform sheet, insulating top and bottom edges, and a synthetic model $\Phi (x)=(50V/m)x$. The model readings $4.0\mathrm{V}$ at $x=0.08\mathrm{m}$ and $5.0\mathrm{V}$ at $x=0.10\mathrm{m}$ imply $E_x=-50V/m$. These values are calculated illustrations, not reported experimental data. The documented circular-electrode experiment similarly estimates the electric field from readings at successive centimetre marks.^[ref]

Useful controls include checking the voltmeter zero, checking that the electric potential difference along each painted electrode is negligible, and repeating reference readings to detect supply drift. Reversing the supply should reverse the signs relative to the same reference contact. Contact resistance, leakage electric currents, and touching the sheet can distort the map. A voltmeter has finite input electrical resistance and draws a small electric current; voltmeter loading changes the quantity being measured if that electrical resistance is insufficiently large relative to the sheet's effective source electrical resistance.^[ref][ref]

The paper carries a steady electric current, so this is a planar analogue rather than a direct measurement of isolated point charges in three-dimensional vacuum. For constant electrical conductivity, Ohm's law and steady charge conservation give $\mathbf{j}=-\sigma \nabla \Phi$ and $\nabla \cdot \mathbf{j}=0$, hence the two-dimensional Laplace equation away from electrodes. Insulating sheet edges impose zero normal electric current, while finite electrodes fix boundary values. This derivation explains both the analogy and its limits: inhomogeneous paper, finite boundaries, and finite electrodes can change the contours. One should not fit the three-dimensional point charge formula $kQ/r$ to a planar map without testing that model. Small probe spacing resolves spatial variation better, but amplifies uncertainty in the inferred finite difference. The published laboratory instructions explicitly ask students to assess whether their proposed field fit is appropriate.^[ref][ref]

The scalar description has a crucial limit. Faraday's law of induction for a stationary closed path $\Gamma$ sayswhere ${\Phi }_B$ is magnetic flux. Nonzero changing magnetic flux gives nonzero circulation, incompatible with a single-valued electric potential alone. More generally, a scalar electric potential and a magnetic vector potential together giveConsequently, in the presence of induction, two voltmeter lead routes between the same contacts can produce different readings if the enclosed magnetic flux changes. This follows by subtracting the two path line integrals; it is a deduction from Faraday's law of induction, not a claimed outcome of the paper experiment. The steady setup and negligible induction justify interpreting its readings as electric potential differences. Merely introducing a scalar electric potential that depends on time cannot supply a nonzero curl of the electric field.^[ref]

A short mathematical justification connects the statements above. Along a smooth path, the chain rule gives $d\Phi =\nabla \Phi \cdot d\mathbf{l}$. Integrating and using $\mathbf{E}=-\nabla \Phi$ yields the endpoint formula by the fundamental theorem for line integrals, proving path independence. Conversely, vanishing circulation around every closed path lets us define $\Phi (P)=-{\int }_{P_0}^P\mathbf{E}\cdot d\mathbf{l}$ independently of the route, with $\Phi (P_0)=0$. Zero curl is a local test; for a continuously differentiable curl-free vector field, a simply connected open region suffices for a global potential. The explicit finite-source formula already gives a global electric potential away from its source points.^[ref]

Embed the planar vector field as $\mathbf{V}=(A(x,y),B(x,y),0)$, independent of $z$. Applying the Cartesian curl formula givesConsequently, for continuously differentiable components,This is the local closedness condition for the one-form $Adx+Bdy$. To infer global path independence from this condition alone, the domain also matters: it suffices that the planar domain is a simply connected space. The polynomial field in the next calculation is defined on the whole plane, so there is no missing-hole obstruction.

Regard the planar vector field as $(A(x,y),B(x,y),0)$, with no dependence on $z$. Its curl isThus, for continuously differentiable $A$ and $B$, the necessary and sufficient pointwise condition isTo deduce global path independence from this local condition also requires a suitable domain, for example a simply connected domain.

Set $P=10x^4-2x{y}^3$ and $Q=-3x^2{y}^2$. Their partial derivatives satisfy $P_y=-6x{y}^2=Q_x$ throughout ${\mathbb{R}}^2$. The vector field is smooth on the entire simply connected plane, so zero curl proves path independence.

Choose the broken straight path $(0,0)\to (2,0)\to (2,1)$. Along its horizontal segment $y=0$ and $dy=0$, givingAlong its vertical segment $x=2$ and $dx=0$, givingTherefore the line integral is

An exact differential is an expression $Pdx+Qdy$ that equals $df=f_{x}dx+f_{y}dy$ for a single-valued differentiable function $f$ on the domain. Its line integral is an endpoint difference by the fundamental theorem for line integrals.

Integrating $f_x=P$ with respect to $x$ gives $f=2x^5-x^2{y}^3+g(y)$. Matching $f_y=-3x^2{y}^2+g^{\prime }(y)$ to $Q$ requires $g^{\prime }(y)=0$. HenceThe arbitrary additive constant cancels. This constructs the vector-field potential globally and provides a second proof of path independence.

For a sufficiently smooth vector field on an oriented surface $S$ with compatible boundary orientation, Stokes theorem statesApply it to $\mathbf{F}=(P,Q,0)$ in the plane. The closed line integral is the area integral of $Q_x-P_y$. Thus $P_y=Q_x$ makes it vanish whenever a spanning surface lies within the smooth domain. In a simply connected domain this implies path independence: join one path from $A$ to $B$ to the reverse of another, and their difference is a zero closed line integral.

The domain qualification is essential. On the punctured plane, $P=-y/(x^2+y^2)$, $Q=x/(x^2+y^2)$ satisfy $P_y=Q_x$, but the line integral around the unit circle is $2\pi$. A disk spanning that circle passes through the singularity. Hence the printed implication requires an appropriate domain assumption; zero curl alone is not a global path independence theorem.

For a plane domain, the following are equivalent descriptions of a simply connected domain: every based loop contracts in the domain with its basepoint fixed; any two paths with the same endpoints are homotopic while those endpoints stay fixed; its complement in the Riemann sphere is connected; every holomorphic function has a single-valued primitive; and every nowhere-zero holomorphic function has a holomorphic logarithm. The complement must be taken in the extended plane, including infinity. An equivalent winding number formulation is that every closed curve has index zero about every point outside the domain.

Here is a direct equivalence proof for the first two topological formulations. If all paths with given endpoints are homotopic relative to those endpoints, apply this to a loop based at $a$ and the constant path at $a$, obtaining a contraction. Conversely, let ${\gamma }_0,{\gamma }_1$ join $a$ to $b$. The loop ${\gamma }_0\ast {\gamma }_1^{-1}$ contracts with basepoint fixed. Concatenating this contraction with ${\gamma }_1$ produces a homotopy from ${\gamma }_0\ast {\gamma }_1^{-1}\ast {\gamma }_1$ to ${\gamma }_1$, relative to $a,b$. The middle retracing excursion contracts by shortening its traversal in both directions, giving a homotopy from that first path to ${\gamma }_0$. Hence ${\gamma }_0$ and ${\gamma }_1$ are homotopic relative to their endpoints. Planar domains are path-connected, so no extra path-component condition is needed.

The analytic descriptions follow from path independence of the holomorphic integral. Local primitives exist on discs by integrating power series; a homotopy can be subdivided into pieces lying in such discs, and local path integrals cancel along its common edges. Thus integrals over homotopic paths agree, giving a global primitive. Applied to $h^{\prime }/h$ for a nowhere-zero function, a primitive $H$ makes $h{e}^{-H}$ constant and hence supplies a holomorphic logarithm. These observations are also the tools used in the mapping proof below.

The Riemann mapping theorem states that every nonempty simply connected proper domain $D⊊\mathbb{C}$ admits a conformal bijection onto the unit disc. Given $z_0\in D$, there is exactly one such map with $f(z_0)=0$ and $f^{\prime }(z_0)>0$. The exclusion of the whole plane is necessary: an entire map into the disc would be constant by Liouville's theorem.

An extremal proof has the following concrete steps. First construct an injective bounded holomorphic map. Choose $a\notin D$ and a holomorphic square root $h$ of $z-a$. It is injective, since equality of its values implies equality of their squares. Its image is disjoint from its negative: $h(z)=-h(w)$ would imply $z=w$ and then $h(z)=0$, impossible. If $b=h(z_0)$, choose $r>0$ with $B(b,r)\subset h(D)$; the disc $B(-b,r)$ is omitted. Therefore $1/(h+b)$ is injective and bounded. Scaling it and applying an automorphism of the unit disk gives a map into the disc taking $z_0$ to zero; a rotation makes its derivative positive.

Let $\mathcal{U}$ consist of all injective maps $D\to \mathbb{D}$ with this normalization. It is nonempty. The derivative at $z_0$ is bounded above by the Cauchy integral formula on a small disc compactly contained in $D$. Choose $f_n\in \mathcal{U}$ with derivatives tending to their positive supremum $L$. Boundedness, the Cauchy estimates and a diagonal Arzelà-Ascoli theorem argument give a subsequence converging locally uniformly to $f$; this is the bounded-family form of the Montel theorem. Then $f(z_0)=0$, $f^{\prime }(z_0)=L>0$, and the maximum modulus principle puts its image in the open disc. The limit is injective: if distinct $z,w$ had $f(z)=f(w)$, apply Hurwitz's theorem near $w$ to $f_n(\cdot )-f_n(z)$, which has no zero there; the limit would vanish identically, contradicting $f^{\prime }(z_0)>0$.

Finally suppose $a\in \mathbb{D}$ is omitted by $f$. It is nonzero since $f(z_0)=0$. Let $T_a(w)=(w-a)/(1-\overline{a}w)$ and choose a holomorphic square root $h$ of $T_a\circ f$. It is injective and takes values in the disc. Put $b=h(z_0)$, so $|b|=\sqrt{|a|}$, and normalize $T_b\circ h$ by a rotation. The new map's derivative magnitude at $z_0$ isThis square-root improvement of a normalized conformal map contradicts extremality. Thus $f$ is onto. Two normalized bijections differ by a disc automorphism fixing zero; Schwarz lemma applied to it and its inverse makes it a rotation, and positivity of the normalized derivatives forces that rotation to be the identity. This completes the requested proof outline.

When $\alpha =2\beta$, all three values reduce to $-\beta /3$. To prove path independence for every piecewise smooth path, construct a global potential rather than infer it from agreement on only three paths. Integrating the coefficient of $dx$ and then matching the coefficient of $dy$ givesIndeed ${\Phi }_x=2\beta (x^2+xy)=\alpha (x^2+xy)$ and ${\Phi }_y=\beta (x^2+y^2)$. The integrand is the exact differential $d\Phi$ throughout ${\mathbb{R}}^2$. The fundamental theorem for line integrals therefore gives, for every such path from $A$ to $B$,

Parametrize the smooth path by $\gamma :[0,1]\to G$. The chain rule turns the line integral of the gradient into a one-variable derivative:This is the fundamental theorem for line integrals; in particular the integral has path independence.

For a twice continuously differentiable potential of a conservative vector field, the curl of its gradient vanishes because mixed partial derivatives commute:A smooth gradient field is necessarily curl-free.

A sufficient condition is that $G$ be an open simply connected domain, with $\mathbf{F}$ continuously differentiable. Under this condition a curl-free vector field has a global potential of a conservative vector field and hence path independence by the fundamental theorem for line integrals. One way to see the global step is to deform the closed loop formed by two paths into a point inside $G$: the integral is unchanged during the deformation because the curl is zero, as expressed by Stokes theorem. Therefore simple connectivity is a sufficient domain hypothesis. It is not a claim that every particular curl-free field needs such a domain; a given field can have a global potential on a domain with holes.

Integrate $f_x=y{e}^x$ with respect to $x$, obtaining $f=y{e}^x+g(y,z)$. Matching $f_y=e^x+2y{z}^3$ gives $g_y=2y{z}^3$, so $g=y^2{z}^3+h(z)$. Finally, $f_z=3y^2{z}^2+h^{\prime }(z)$ must equal the third component, so $h^{\prime }=0$. Thus a scalar potential isThe fundamental theorem for line integrals now gives ${\int }_{C}v\cdot dr=f(1,1,1)-f(0,0,0)=e+1$ for either path, confirming both direct computations. Since the curl of a gradient is zero for this smooth function, it also confirms the result in part (b). The potential is defined throughout ${\mathbb{R}}^3$, so no domain obstruction to path independence occurs.

For $\mathbf{r}(t)=(t,t^2,t^2)$, the velocity is $(1,2t,2t)$. Because $y=z$ throughout this path, both fields again agree pointwise, now as $(3t^8,2t^7,t^7)$. ThusThese equal values alone do not establish path independence for either field on all of space.

On the first segment only $z$ varies and $F_z=x^{2}y=0$. On the second only $y$ varies and $F_y=x^{2}z=0$. On the last segment $y=z=\pi$, so the line integral isThe agreement is the expected path independence of a conservative vector field.

On the circular arc, $z=0$ and $dz=0$, so the line integral reduces toThis exact differential evaluation applies to the specified arc; for example its parametric equation is $(x,y,z)=(1-\cos \theta ,\sin \theta ,0)$, $0\le \theta \le \pi /2$. On the vertical segment $x=y=1$, only $dz$ contributes, giving ${\int }_0^1(\lambda +1)dz=\lambda +1$. The whole path therefore givesTo answer the final conservativeness requirement, compute the curl:It vanishes identically exactly whenOn the simply connected whole space this condition is sufficient for a conservative vector field. Explicitly a vector-field potential isBoth path calculations then give $13/6$, equal to $\varphi (1,1,1)-\varphi (0,0,0)$ by the fundamental theorem for line integrals. Equality of just these two path values would only force $\mu =2\lambda +1$; it is the curl calculation that establishes full path independence.

A line integral is path dependent when two admissible paths with the same starting and ending points give different values. This disproves path independence and, for a vector field, shows that it is not a conservative vector field on the relevant domain.

A state function assigns a value to each equilibrium thermodynamic state of a specified thermodynamic system. Its change depends only on the initial and final states. Internal energy $U$, entropy $S$ and enthalpy $H=U+pV$ are state functions; here $p$ is pressure and $V$ is volume. Transferred heat $Q$ and work $W$ belong to a thermodynamic process, rather than to a state. A system stores internal energy; it does not store separate inventories of “heat received” and “work received”.^[ref]

Use the explicit convention $Q>0$ for heat entering and $W_{\mathrm{by}}>0$ for work done by the thermodynamic system on its surroundings. For a closed system with unchanged endpoint bulk kinetic energy and external potential energy, the first law of thermodynamics readsThe notation $dU$ denotes an exact differential of a state function; $\delta Q$ and $\delta W_{\mathrm{by}}$ denote incremental transfers. Along a reversible thermodynamic process of a simple compressible system,where $T$ is absolute temperature. These are rules for particular thermodynamic processes, not definitions of stored heat or stored work. In particular, a quasistatic process with friction can remain near thermodynamic equilibrium while producing entropy.^[ref]

For any state function $F$ and two equilibrium states $A,B$, an integral of its exact differential givesThe proof is telescoping: add the changes $F(x_{i+1})-F(x_i)$ along a subdivided path, and all intermediate values cancel. The smooth limit gives the integral. Conversely, if an integrable differential form has zero integral around every accessible closed path in a connected region, define $F(B)$ by integrating from a reference state. Two routes differ by a closed path, so the definition is unambiguous. This argument needs every accessible loop, rather than a local test that might miss a hole in the domain; see path independence.

The same cancellation does not hold separately for heat and work. A thermodynamic cycle has $\Delta U=0$ but can have nonzero net transfers, with $\oint \delta Q=\oint \delta W_{\mathrm{by}}$. Nor does the fact that entropy is a state function make $Q/T$ its general change: the formula $dS=\delta Q_{\mathrm{rev}}/T$ uses a reversible thermodynamic process and its varying temperature.

This distinction makes endpoint calculations powerful. We can compute an internal energy, entropy or enthalpy difference along a convenient reversible reference path even when the actual thermodynamic process is irreversible. Its actual heat and work must still be obtained from its own boundary interactions. The appealing cancellation is visible in two reversible ideal-gas paths between the same states: a different mechanical output requires a matching difference in thermal input, while stored internal energy arrives at the same value.

Use a velocity potential to reconstruct an irrotational flow from one scalar field. A velocity potential $\varphi (\mathbf{x},t)$ satisfiesIt has units ${\mathrm{m}}^2{\mathrm{s}}^{-1}$ and is unchanged as a description of the velocity field when any function of time alone is added. For twice continuously differentiable $\varphi$, the identity curl of a gradient proves zero vorticity. In incompressible flow, taking the divergence also gives ${\nabla }^2\varphi =0$, the Laplace equation. This turns a three-component velocity field into a single harmonic function with appropriate boundary conditions. ^[ref]

For uniform flow $\mathbf{u}=(U,0,0)$, take $\varphi =Ux$. With $U=2\mathrm{m}{\mathrm{s}}^{-1}$, the change from $x=0$ to $x=3\mathrm{m}$ is $\Delta \varphi =6{\mathrm{m}}^2{\mathrm{s}}^{-1}$. By the fundamental theorem for line integrals, the line integral of velocity between these points equals that change along any path in the domain; a closed curve gives zero circulation.

For the potential line vortex, choose a local angle branch in polar coordinates and set $\varphi =K\theta$. Then $u_r={\partial }_r\varphi =0$ and $u_{\theta }=r^{-1}{\partial }_{\theta }\varphi =K/r$. One counterclockwise turn changes the continued velocity potential by $2\pi K$, although the velocity field returns to its original value. With $K=1{\mathrm{m}}^2{\mathrm{s}}^{-1}$, this change is $2\pi {\mathrm{m}}^2{\mathrm{s}}^{-1}$, exactly the circulation. A full annulus therefore admits local angle branches and a multivalued velocity potential, but no global single-valued velocity potential when $K\ne 0$. Cutting the annulus along a radial line allows a single-valued angle branch on the remaining domain. The obstruction is path independence, not a failure of the local gradient formula.