1. Foundation Coalition Computer Visualization  Rethink Vector Calculus 3rd Int Conf Tech in Math Teaching. Koblenz: October 1997 Matthias Kawski, AZ State Univ. http://math.la.asu.edu/~kawski 1 ACEPT How CAS and Visualization lead to a complete rethinking of an intro to vector calculus Matthias Kawski Department of Mathematics Arizona State University kawski@asu.edu http://math.la.asu.edu/~kawski Lots of MAPLE worksheets (in all degrees of rawness), plus plenty of other class-materials: Daily instructions, tests, extended projects “VISUAL CALCULUS” (to come soon, MAPLE, JAVA, VRML) This work was partially supported by the NSF through Cooperative Agreement EEC-92-21460 (Foundation Coalition) and the grant DUE 94-53610 (ACEPT)

2. Foundation Coalition Computer Visualization  Rethink Vector Calculus 3rd Int Conf Tech in Math Teaching. Koblenz: October 1997 Matthias Kawski, AZ State Univ. http://math.la.asu.edu/~kawski 2 ACEPT You zoom in calculus I for derivatives / slopes -- Why then don’t you zoom in calculus III for curl, div, and Stokes’ theorem ? How CAS and Visualization lead to a complete rethinking of an intro to vector calculus Zooming Uniform differentiability Linear Vector Fields Derivatives of Nonlinear Vector Fields Animating curl and divergence Stokes’ Theorem via linearizations Controllability versus conservative fields / potentials review: distinguish different kinds of zooming side-track, regarding rigor etc.

3. Foundation Coalition Computer Visualization  Rethink Vector Calculus 3rd Int Conf Tech in Math Teaching. Koblenz: October 1997 Matthias Kawski, AZ State Univ. http://math.la.asu.edu/~kawski 3 ACEPT The pre-calculator days The textbook shows a static picture. The teacher thinks of the process. The students think limits mean factoring/canceling rational expressions and anyhow are convinced that tangent lines can only touch at one point.

4. Foundation Coalition Computer Visualization  Rethink Vector Calculus 3rd Int Conf Tech in Math Teaching. Koblenz: October 1997 Matthias Kawski, AZ State Univ. http://math.la.asu.edu/~kawski 4 ACEPT Multi-media, JAVA, VRML 3.0 ??? Multi-media, VRML etc. animate the process. The “process-idea” of a limit comes across. Is it just adapting new technology to old pictures???

5. Foundation Coalition Computer Visualization  Rethink Vector Calculus 3rd Int Conf Tech in Math Teaching. Koblenz: October 1997 Matthias Kawski, AZ State Univ. http://math.la.asu.edu/~kawski 5 ACEPT Calculators have ZOOM button ! New technologies provide new avenues: Each student zooms at a different point, leaves final result on screen, all get up, and …………..WHAT A MEMORABLE EXPERIENCE! (rigorous, and capturing the most important and idea of all!) Tickmarks contain info about  and 

6. Foundation Coalition Computer Visualization  Rethink Vector Calculus 3rd Int Conf Tech in Math Teaching. Koblenz: October 1997 Matthias Kawski, AZ State Univ. http://math.la.asu.edu/~kawski 6 ACEPT Zooming in on numerical tables This applies to all: single variable, multi-variable and vector calculus. In this presentation only, emphasize graphical approach and analysis.

7. Foundation Coalition Computer Visualization  Rethink Vector Calculus 3rd Int Conf Tech in Math Teaching. Koblenz: October 1997 Matthias Kawski, AZ State Univ. http://math.la.asu.edu/~kawski 7 ACEPT Zooming on contour diagrams Easier than 3D. -- Important: recognize contour diagrams of planes!!

8. Foundation Coalition Computer Visualization  Rethink Vector Calculus 3rd Int Conf Tech in Math Teaching. Koblenz: October 1997 Matthias Kawski, AZ State Univ. http://math.la.asu.edu/~kawski 8 ACEPT Gradient field: Zooming out of normals! Pedagogically correct order: Zoom in on contour diagram until linear, assign one normal vector to each magnified picture, then ZOOM OUT, put all small pictures together to BUILD a varying gradient field ……..

9. Foundation Coalition Computer Visualization  Rethink Vector Calculus 3rd Int Conf Tech in Math Teaching. Koblenz: October 1997 Matthias Kawski, AZ State Univ. http://math.la.asu.edu/~kawski 9 ACEPT Zooming for line-INTEGRALS of vfs Zooming for INTEGRATION?? -- derivative of curve, integral of field! YES, there are TWO kinds of zooming needed in introductory calculus! Without the blue curve this is the pictorial foundation for the convergence of Euler’s and related methods for numerically integrating diff. equations

10. Foundation Coalition Computer Visualization  Rethink Vector Calculus 3rd Int Conf Tech in Math Teaching. Koblenz: October 1997 Matthias Kawski, AZ State Univ. http://math.la.asu.edu/~kawski 10 ACEPT Two kinds of zooming Zooming of the zeroth kind Magnify domain only Keep range fixed Picture for continuity (local constancy) Existence of limits of Riemann sums (integrals) Zooming of the first kind Magnify BOTH domain and range Picture for differentiability (local linearity) Need to ignore (subtract) constant part -- picture can not show total magnitude!!! It is extremely simple, just consistently apply rules all the way to vfs

11. Foundation Coalition Computer Visualization  Rethink Vector Calculus 3rd Int Conf Tech in Math Teaching. Koblenz: October 1997 Matthias Kawski, AZ State Univ. http://math.la.asu.edu/~kawski 11 ACEPT The usual  boxes for continuity This is EXACTLY the  characterization of continuity at a point, but without these symbols. CAUTION: All usual fallacies of confusion of order of quantifiers still apply -- but are now closer to common sense!

12. Foundation Coalition Computer Visualization  Rethink Vector Calculus 3rd Int Conf Tech in Math Teaching. Koblenz: October 1997 Matthias Kawski, AZ State Univ. http://math.la.asu.edu/~kawski 12 ACEPT Zooming of 0 th kind in calculus I Continuity via zooming: Zoom in domain only: Tickmarks show  >0. Fixed vertical window size controlled by  Continuity via zooming: Zoom in domain only: Tickmarks show  >0. Fixed vertical window size controlled by 

13. Foundation Coalition Computer Visualization  Rethink Vector Calculus 3rd Int Conf Tech in Math Teaching. Koblenz: October 1997 Matthias Kawski, AZ State Univ. http://math.la.asu.edu/~kawski 13 ACEPT Convergence of R-sums via zooming of zeroth kind (continuity) The zooming of 0 th kind picture demonstrate that the limit exists! -- The first part for the proof in advanced calculus: (Uniform) continuity => integrability. Key idea: “Further subdivisions will not change the sum” => Cauchy sequence. The zooming of 0 th kind picture demonstrate that the limit exists! -- The first part for the proof in advanced calculus: (Uniform) continuity => integrability. Key idea: “Further subdivisions will not change the sum” => Cauchy sequence. Common pictures demonstrate how area is exhausted in limit. Common pictures demonstrate how area is exhausted in limit.

14. Foundation Coalition Computer Visualization  Rethink Vector Calculus 3rd Int Conf Tech in Math Teaching. Koblenz: October 1997 Matthias Kawski, AZ State Univ. http://math.la.asu.edu/~kawski 14 ACEPT Zooming of the 2 nd kind, calculus I Zooming at quadratic ratios (in range /domain) exhibits “local quadratic-ness” near nondegenerate extrema. Even more impressive for surfaces! Zooming at quadratic ratios (in range /domain) exhibits “local quadratic-ness” near nondegenerate extrema. Even more impressive for surfaces! Pure meanness: Instead of “find the min-value”, ask for “find the x-coordinate (to 12 decimal places) of the min”. Pure meanness: Instead of “find the min-value”, ask for “find the x-coordinate (to 12 decimal places) of the min”. Why can’t one answer this by standard zooming on a calculator? Answer: The first derivative test! Why can’t one answer this by standard zooming on a calculator? Answer: The first derivative test! Also: Zooming out of “n-th” kind e.g. to find power of polynomial, establish nonpol character of exp.

15. Foundation Coalition Computer Visualization  Rethink Vector Calculus 3rd Int Conf Tech in Math Teaching. Koblenz: October 1997 Matthias Kawski, AZ State Univ. http://math.la.asu.edu/~kawski 15 ACEPT Zooming of the 1 st kind, calculus I Slightly more advanced,  characterization of differentiability at point. Useful for error-estimates in approximations, mental picture for proofs.

16. Foundation Coalition Computer Visualization  Rethink Vector Calculus 3rd Int Conf Tech in Math Teaching. Koblenz: October 1997 Matthias Kawski, AZ State Univ. http://math.la.asu.edu/~kawski 16 ACEPT Uniform continuity, pictorially A short side-excursion, re rigor in proof of Stokes’ thm. Many have argued that uniform continuity belongs into freshmen calc. Practically all proofs require it, who cares about continuity at a point? Now we have the graphical tools -- it is so natural, LET US DO IT!! Demonstration : Slide tubings of various radii over bent-wire!

17. Foundation Coalition Computer Visualization  Rethink Vector Calculus 3rd Int Conf Tech in Math Teaching. Koblenz: October 1997 Matthias Kawski, AZ State Univ. http://math.la.asu.edu/~kawski 17 ACEPT Uniform differentiability, pictorially A short side-excursion, re rigor in proof of Stokes’ thm. With the hypothesis of uniform differentiability much less trouble with order of quantifiers in any proof of any fundamental/Stokes’ theorem. Naïve proof ideas easily go thru, no need for awkward MeanValueThm Demonstration : Slide cones of various opening angles over bent-wire! Compare e.g. books by Keith Stroyan

18. Foundation Coalition Computer Visualization  Rethink Vector Calculus 3rd Int Conf Tech in Math Teaching. Koblenz: October 1997 Matthias Kawski, AZ State Univ. http://math.la.asu.edu/~kawski 18 ACEPT Zooming of 0 th kind in multivar.calc. Surfaces become flat, contours disappear, tables become constant? Boring? Not at all! Only this allows us to proceed w/ Riemann integrals!

19. Foundation Coalition Computer Visualization  Rethink Vector Calculus 3rd Int Conf Tech in Math Teaching. Koblenz: October 1997 Matthias Kawski, AZ State Univ. http://math.la.asu.edu/~kawski 19 ACEPT  for unif. continuity in multivar. calc. Graphs sandwiched in cages -- exactly as in calc I. Uniformity: Terrific JAVA-VRML animations of moving cages, fixed size. 19

20. Foundation Coalition Computer Visualization  Rethink Vector Calculus 3rd Int Conf Tech in Math Teaching. Koblenz: October 1997 Matthias Kawski, AZ State Univ. http://math.la.asu.edu/~kawski 20 ACEPT Zooming of 1 st kind in multivar.calc. If surface becomes planar (linear) after magnification, call it differentiable at point. Partial derivatives (cross-sections become straight -- compare T.Dick & calculators) Gradients (contour diagrams become equidistant parallel straight lines)

21. Foundation Coalition Computer Visualization  Rethink Vector Calculus 3rd Int Conf Tech in Math Teaching. Koblenz: October 1997 Matthias Kawski, AZ State Univ. http://math.la.asu.edu/~kawski 21 ACEPT  for unif. differentiability in multivar.calc. Graphs sandwiched between truncated cones -- as in calc I. New: Analogous pictures for contour diagrams (and gradients) Animation: Slide this cone (with tilting center plane around) (uniformity) Animation: Slide this cone (with tilting center plane around) (uniformity) Advanced calc: Where are  and  Advanced calc: Where are  and  Still need lots of work finding good examples good parameter values

22. Foundation Coalition Computer Visualization  Rethink Vector Calculus 3rd Int Conf Tech in Math Teaching. Koblenz: October 1997 Matthias Kawski, AZ State Univ. http://math.la.asu.edu/~kawski 22 ACEPT  charact. for continuity in vector calc. Warning: These are uncharted waters -- we are completely unfamiliar with these pictures. Usual = continuity only via components functions; Danger: each of these is rather tricky F k (x,y,z) JOINTLY(?) continuous. Analogous animations for uniform continuity, differentiability, unif.differentiability. Common problem: Independent scaling of domain / range ??? (“Tangent spaces”!!)

23. Foundation Coalition Computer Visualization  Rethink Vector Calculus 3rd Int Conf Tech in Math Teaching. Koblenz: October 1997 Matthias Kawski, AZ State Univ. http://math.la.asu.edu/~kawski 23 ACEPT Linear vector fields ??? Who knows how to tell whether a pictured vector field is linear? ---> What do linear vector fields look like? Do we care? ((Do students need a better understanding of linearity anywhere?)) Who knows how to tell whether a pictured vector field is linear? ---> What do linear vector fields look like? Do we care? ((Do students need a better understanding of linearity anywhere?)) What are the curl and the divergence of linear vector fields? Can we see them? How do we define these as analogues of slope? Usually we see them only in the DE course (if at all, even there).

24. Foundation Coalition Computer Visualization  Rethink Vector Calculus 3rd Int Conf Tech in Math Teaching. Koblenz: October 1997 Matthias Kawski, AZ State Univ. http://math.la.asu.edu/~kawski 24 ACEPT Linearity ??? Definition: A map/function/operator L: X -> Y is linear if L(cP)=c L(p) and L(p+q)=L(p)+L(q) for all ….. Can your students show where to find L(p),L(p+q)……. in the picture? We need to get used to: “linear” here means “y-intercept is zero”. Additivity of points (identify P with vector OP). Authors/teachers need to learn to distinguish macroscopic, microscopic, infinitesimal vectors, tangent spaces,... Odd-ness and homogeneity are much easier to spot than additivity [y/4,(2*abs(x)-x)/9]

25. Foundation Coalition Computer Visualization  Rethink Vector Calculus 3rd Int Conf Tech in Math Teaching. Koblenz: October 1997 Matthias Kawski, AZ State Univ. http://math.la.asu.edu/~kawski 25 ACEPT What is the analogue of “slope” for vector fields? First recall: “linear” and slope in precalc Consider divided differences, rise over run Linear ratio is CONSTANT, INDEPENDENT of the choice of points (x k,y k ) yy xx

26. Foundation Coalition Computer Visualization  Rethink Vector Calculus 3rd Int Conf Tech in Math Teaching. Koblenz: October 1997 Matthias Kawski, AZ State Univ. http://math.la.asu.edu/~kawski 26 ACEPT Constant ratios for linear fields Work with polygonal paths in linear fields, each student has a different basepoint, a different shape, each student calculates the flux/circulation line integral w/o calculus (midpoint/trapezoidal sums!!), (and e.g. via machine for circles etc, symbolically or numerically), then report findings to overhead in front --> easy suggestion to normalize by area --> what a surprise, independence of shape and location! just like slope.

27. Foundation Coalition Computer Visualization  Rethink Vector Calculus 3rd Int Conf Tech in Math Teaching. Koblenz: October 1997 Matthias Kawski, AZ State Univ. http://math.la.asu.edu/~kawski 27 ACEPT Algebraic formulas: tr(L), (L-L T )/2 (x 0,y 0 ) (x 0,y 0 -  y) (x 0,y 0 +  y) (x 0 +  x,y 0 )(x 0 -  x, y 0 ) for L(x,y) = (ax+by,cx+dy), using only midpoint rule (exact!) and linearity for e.g. circulation integral over rectangle Coordinate-free GEOMETRIC arguments w/ triangles, simplices in 3D are even nicer Develop understanding where (a+d), (c-b) etc come from in limit free setting first

28. Foundation Coalition Computer Visualization  Rethink Vector Calculus 3rd Int Conf Tech in Math Teaching. Koblenz: October 1997 Matthias Kawski, AZ State Univ. http://math.la.asu.edu/~kawski 28 ACEPT Telescoping sums Recall: For linear functions, the fundamental theorem is exact without limits, it is just a telescoping sum! Want: Stokes’ theorem for linear fields FIRST!

29. Foundation Coalition Computer Visualization  Rethink Vector Calculus 3rd Int Conf Tech in Math Teaching. Koblenz: October 1997 Matthias Kawski, AZ State Univ. http://math.la.asu.edu/~kawski 29 ACEPT Telescoping sums for linear Greens’ thm. This extends formulas from line-integrals over rectangles / triangles first to general polygonal curves (no limits yet!), then to smooth curves. The picture new TELESCOPING SUMS matters (cancellations!) Caution, when arguing with triangulations of smooth surfaces

30. Foundation Coalition Computer Visualization  Rethink Vector Calculus 3rd Int Conf Tech in Math Teaching. Koblenz: October 1997 Matthias Kawski, AZ State Univ. http://math.la.asu.edu/~kawski 30 ACEPT Nonlinear vector fields, zoom 1 st kind If after zooming of the first kind we obtain a linear field, we declare the original field differentiable at this point, and define the divergence/rotation/curl to be the trace/skew symmetric part of the linear field we see after zooming. The original vector field, colored by rot Same vector field after subtracting constant part (from the point for zooming)

31. Foundation Coalition Computer Visualization  Rethink Vector Calculus 3rd Int Conf Tech in Math Teaching. Koblenz: October 1997 Matthias Kawski, AZ State Univ. http://math.la.asu.edu/~kawski 31 ACEPT Check for understanding (important) Zooming of the 1 st kind on a linear object returns the same object! After zooming of first kind! original v-field is linear subtract constant part at p

32. Foundation Coalition Computer Visualization  Rethink Vector Calculus 3rd Int Conf Tech in Math Teaching. Koblenz: October 1997 Matthias Kawski, AZ State Univ. http://math.la.asu.edu/~kawski 32 ACEPT Student exercise: Limit Fix a nonlin field, a few base points, a set of contours, different students set up & evaluate line integrals over their contour at their point, and let the contour shrink. Report all results to transparency in the front. Scale by area, SEE convergence. Instead of ZOOMING, this perspective lets the contours shrink to a point. Do not forget to also draw these contours after magnification!

33. Foundation Coalition Computer Visualization  Rethink Vector Calculus 3rd Int Conf Tech in Math Teaching. Koblenz: October 1997 Matthias Kawski, AZ State Univ. http://math.la.asu.edu/~kawski 33 ACEPT Integrals & continuity Derivatives Show all Symm part only Anti-symm part dxdy-magnification factor xy-magnification factor 1 10 100 1000 infinity An interactive JAVA microscope to zoom for derivatives of vector fields realized by Shannon Holland, ASU. http://www.eas.asu.edu/~asufc/microscope Final version to be presented at the ICTCM, Chicago in November 1997

34. Foundation Coalition Computer Visualization  Rethink Vector Calculus 3rd Int Conf Tech in Math Teaching. Koblenz: October 1997 Matthias Kawski, AZ State Univ. http://math.la.asu.edu/~kawski 34 ACEPT Rigor in the defn: Differentiability Recall: Usual definitions of differentiability rely much on joint continuity of partial derivatives of component functions. This is not geometric, and troublesome: diff’able not same as “partials exist” Recall: Usual definitions of differentiability rely much on joint continuity of partial derivatives of component functions. This is not geometric, and troublesome: diff’able not same as “partials exist” Better: Do it like in graduate school -- the zooming picture is right! A function/map/operator F between linear spaces X and Z is uniformly differentiable on a set K if for every p in K there exists a linear map L = L p such that for every  > 0 there exists a  > 0 (indep.of p) such that | F(q) - F(p) - L p (q-p) | <  | q - p | (or analogous pointwise definition). A function/map/operator F between linear spaces X and Z is uniformly differentiable on a set K if for every p in K there exists a linear map L = L p such that for every  > 0 there exists a  > 0 (indep.of p) such that | F(q) - F(p) - L p (q-p) | <  | q - p | (or analogous pointwise definition). Advantage of uniform: Never any problems when working with little-oh: F(q) = F(p) + L p (q-p) +o( | q - p | ) -- all the way to proof of Stokes’ thm.

35. Foundation Coalition Computer Visualization  Rethink Vector Calculus 3rd Int Conf Tech in Math Teaching. Koblenz: October 1997 Matthias Kawski, AZ State Univ. http://math.la.asu.edu/~kawski 35 ACEPT Divergence, rotation, curl For a differentiable field define (where contour shrinks to the point p, circumference -->0 ) Intuitively define the divergence of F at p to be the trace of L, where L is the linear field to which the zooming at p converges (!!). For a linear field we defined (and showed independence of everything): Use your judgment worrying about independence of the contour here…. Use your judgment worrying about independence of the contour here…. Consequence:

36. Foundation Coalition Computer Visualization  Rethink Vector Calculus 3rd Int Conf Tech in Math Teaching. Koblenz: October 1997 Matthias Kawski, AZ State Univ. http://math.la.asu.edu/~kawski 36 ACEPT Proof of Stokes’ theorem, nonlinear In complete analogy to the proof of the fundamental theorem in calc I: telescoping sums + limits (+uniform differentiability, or MVTh, or handwaving….). In complete analogy to the proof of the fundamental theorem in calc I: telescoping sums + limits (+uniform differentiability, or MVTh, or handwaving….). Here the hand-waving version: The critical steps use the linear result, and the observation that on each small region the vector field is practically linear. It straightforward to put in little-oh’s, use uniform diff., and check that the orders of errors and number of terms in sum behave as expected! It straightforward to put in little-oh’s, use uniform diff., and check that the orders of errors and number of terms in sum behave as expected!

37. Foundation Coalition Computer Visualization  Rethink Vector Calculus 3rd Int Conf Tech in Math Teaching. Koblenz: October 1997 Matthias Kawski, AZ State Univ. http://math.la.asu.edu/~kawski 37 ACEPT About little-oh’s & uniform differentiability Key: Stay away from pathological, arbitrary large surfaces bounding arbitrary small volumes, Key: Stay away from pathological, arbitrary large surfaces bounding arbitrary small volumes, Except for small number (lower order)of outside regions, hypothesize a regular subdivision, i.e. without pathological relations between diameter, circumference/surface area, volume! Except for small number (lower order)of outside regions, hypothesize a regular subdivision, i.e. without pathological relations between diameter, circumference/surface area, volume! The errors in the two approximate equalities in the nonlinear telescoping sum: By hypothesis, for every p there exist a linear field L p such that for every  > 0 there is a  > 0 (independent of p (!)) such that | F(q) - F(p) - L p (q - p) | <  | q - p | for all q such that | q - p | < . By hypothesis, for every p there exist a linear field L p such that for every  > 0 there is a  > 0 (independent of p (!)) such that | F(q) - F(p) - L p (q - p) | <  | q - p | for all q such that | q - p | < .

38. Foundation Coalition Computer Visualization  Rethink Vector Calculus 3rd Int Conf Tech in Math Teaching. Koblenz: October 1997 Matthias Kawski, AZ State Univ. http://math.la.asu.edu/~kawski 38 ACEPT Trouble w/ surface integrals: “Schwarz’ surface” Pictorially the trouble is obvious. SHADING! Simple fun limit for proof Not at all unreasonable in 1 st multi-var calculus Entertaining. Warning about limitations of intuitive arguments, … yet it is easy to fix!

39. Foundation Coalition Computer Visualization  Rethink Vector Calculus 3rd Int Conf Tech in Math Teaching. Koblenz: October 1997 Matthias Kawski, AZ State Univ. http://math.la.asu.edu/~kawski 39 ACEPT Decompositions Decompose linear, planar vector fields into sum of symm. & skew-symm. part (geometrically -- hard?, angles!!, algebraically = link to linear algebra). (Good place to review the additivity of ((line))integral drift + symmetric+antisymmetric. Decompose linear, planar vector fields into sum of symm. & skew-symm. part (geometrically -- hard?, angles!!, algebraically = link to linear algebra). (Good place to review the additivity of ((line))integral drift + symmetric+antisymmetric. Preliminary: Review that each scalar function may be written as a sum of even and odd part. Preliminary: Review that each scalar function may be written as a sum of even and odd part.

40. Foundation Coalition Computer Visualization  Rethink Vector Calculus 3rd Int Conf Tech in Math Teaching. Koblenz: October 1997 Matthias Kawski, AZ State Univ. http://math.la.asu.edu/~kawski 40 ACEPT “CURL”: An axis of rotation in 3d Requires prior development of decomposition symmetric/antisymmetric in planar case. Addresses additivity of rotation (angular velocity vectors) -- who believes that? Requires prior development of decomposition symmetric/antisymmetric in planar case. Addresses additivity of rotation (angular velocity vectors) -- who believes that? Don’t expect to see much if plotting vector field in 3d w/o special (bundle-) structure, however, plot ANY skew-symmetric linear field (skew-part after zooming 1 st kind), jiggle a little, discover order, rotate until look down a tube, each student different axis Don’t expect to see much if plotting vector field in 3d w/o special (bundle-) structure, however, plot ANY skew-symmetric linear field (skew-part after zooming 1 st kind), jiggle a little, discover order, rotate until look down a tube, each student different axis For more MAPLE files (curl in coords etc) see book: “Zooming and limits,...”, or WWW-site. usual nonsense 3d-fieldjiggle -- wait, there IS order!It is a rigid rotation!

41. Foundation Coalition Computer Visualization  Rethink Vector Calculus 3rd Int Conf Tech in Math Teaching. Koblenz: October 1997 Matthias Kawski, AZ State Univ. http://math.la.asu.edu/~kawski 41 ACEPT Proposed class outline Assuming multi-variable calculus treatment as in Harvard Consortium Calculus, with strong emphasis on Rule of Three, contour diagrams, Riemann sums, zooming. Assuming multi-variable calculus treatment as in Harvard Consortium Calculus, with strong emphasis on Rule of Three, contour diagrams, Riemann sums, zooming. What is a vector field: Pictures. Applications. Gradfields ODEs. Constant vector fields. Work in precalculus setting!. Nonlinear vfs. (Continuity). Line integrals via zooming of 0 th kind. Conservative circulation integrals vanish gradient fields. Linear vector fields. Trace and skew-symmetric-part via line-ints. Telescoping sum (fluxes over interior surfaces cancel etc….), grad all circ.int.vanish irrotational (in linear case, no limits) OPPOSITE: nonintegrable (not exact) “controllable” Nonlinear fields: Zoom, differentiability, divergence, rotation, curl. Stokes’ theorem in all versions via little-oh modification of arguments in linear settings. Magnetic/gravitat. fields revisited.

42. Foundation Coalition Computer Visualization  Rethink Vector Calculus 3rd Int Conf Tech in Math Teaching. Koblenz: October 1997 Matthias Kawski, AZ State Univ. http://math.la.asu.edu/~kawski 42 ACEPT Animate curl & div, integrate DE (drift) Color by rot: red=left turn green=rite turn divergence controls growth

43. Foundation Coalition Computer Visualization  Rethink Vector Calculus 3rd Int Conf Tech in Math Teaching. Koblenz: October 1997 Matthias Kawski, AZ State Univ. http://math.la.asu.edu/~kawski 43 ACEPT Spinning corks in linear / magnetic field Period indep.of radius compare harmonic oscillator - pendulum clock Always same side of the moon faces the Earth -- one rotation per full revolution. Irrotational (black = no color). Angular velocity drops sharply w/increasing radius.

44. Foundation Coalition Computer Visualization  Rethink Vector Calculus 3rd Int Conf Tech in Math Teaching. Koblenz: October 1997 Matthias Kawski, AZ State Univ. http://math.la.asu.edu/~kawski 44 ACEPT Tumbling “soccer balls” in 3D-field Need to see the animation! At this time: User supplies vector field and init cond’s or uses default example. MAPLE integrates DEs for position, calculates curl, integrates angular momentum equations, and creates animation using rotation matrices. Colored faces crucial!

45. Foundation Coalition Computer Visualization  Rethink Vector Calculus 3rd Int Conf Tech in Math Teaching. Koblenz: October 1997 Matthias Kawski, AZ State Univ. http://math.la.asu.edu/~kawski 45 ACEPT Stokes’ theorem & magnetic field Homotop the blue curve into the magenta circle WITHOUT TOUCHING THE WIRE (beautiful animation -- curve sweeping out surface, reminiscent of Jacob’s ladder). 3D=views, jiggling necessary to obtain understanding how curve sits relative to wire. More impressive curve formed from torus knots with arbitrary winding numbers,... Do your students have a mental picture of the objects in the equn?

46. Foundation Coalition Computer Visualization  Rethink Vector Calculus 3rd Int Conf Tech in Math Teaching. Koblenz: October 1997 Matthias Kawski, AZ State Univ. http://math.la.asu.edu/~kawski 46 ACEPT Animation of the re-orientation T = 0 T = 3  t T = 7  t T = 25  t T = 9  t T = 11  t....... d  - F 1 (  1,  2 ) d  1 - F 2 (  1,  2 ) d  2 = 0 Three linked rigid bodies. Total angular momentum always zero = conserved. Yet by moving through a loop is shape-space (  1  2 -space) the attitude  may be changed! (Satellite w/ antenna, falling cat …) Great application of Green’s theorem. Fun animations. Good projects. Link to recent research. CAS required for algebra! 11 22 

47. Foundation Coalition Computer Visualization  Rethink Vector Calculus 3rd Int Conf Tech in Math Teaching. Koblenz: October 1997 Matthias Kawski, AZ State Univ. http://math.la.asu.edu/~kawski 47 ACEPT The graph of the rotation of F(  1,  2 ) Selecting a suitable loop in shape space that results in “maximal” attitudinal change Note the very sharp peaks and pits =-=> key to make this a great project. Randomly chosen curves lead to unpredictable attitude changes. Understanding of Green’s thm systematic choice of loops in shape space to achieve desired attitude change

48. Foundation Coalition Computer Visualization  Rethink Vector Calculus 3rd Int Conf Tech in Math Teaching. Koblenz: October 1997 Matthias Kawski, AZ State Univ. http://math.la.asu.edu/~kawski 48 ACEPT The loop in the base-shape-space and the lifted curve in the total space Observe the nonzero holonomy -- the lifted curve does not close Contrast this with conservative == integrable fields. There (as here) DYNAMICALLY GROW the potential surface using many lifted LOOPS -- don’t just pop it on the screen. CRITICAL: Dynamically animate the loop and the lifted curve. Contrast with potential surface for conservative fields.