.
Find the volumes of the solids generated by revolving the regions bounded by the graphs about the given lines:
y = sqrt(x), y=0, x=3, and x=9
(a) about the x=axis,
(b) about the y-axis,
(c) about the line at x=3,
(d) and about the line at x=9.
Use integration and washer/disk method. I have already solved about the x-axis to be 9/2 pi.
~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~
In the post by @CPhill, part (b) is solved incorrectly.
I came to bring a correct solution for part (b).
I will use the "shell" method, which suits this problem
MUCH BETTER than the "washer/disk" method.
We can present the solid body in this case as a set of thin vertical cylindrical shells
with the axis of cylindrical shells x=0.
Each shell has the length along y-axis from y=0 to y = , so the volume of the solid body is
V = integral over the radius 'x' from 3 to 9 of ,
Integration gives the antiderivative
F(x) = 2pi*(2/5)*x^(5/2) = (4/5)pi*x^(5/2),
and we should calculate the difference
F(9) - F(3) = (4/5)pi*(9^(5/2)-3^(5/2)) = = =
= = = 571.5475 cubic units, approximately.
Solved correctly.
The formula from the @CPhill solution gives the numerical value of
= = 179.7669.
which is totally wrong.
I'm somewhat surprised by the clumsiness of the instruction. It recommends
using a washer/disk method, which is ill-suited for this case.
Apparently, the instruction was written by someone with little or no knowledge of the subject.
\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\
Regarding the post by @CPhill . . .
Keep in mind that @CPhill is a pseudonym for the Google artificial intelligence.
The artificial intelligence in solving Math problems is in the experimental stage of development
and it is far from to be a well-tuned.
It can make mistakes and produce nonsense.
It has no feeling of shame - it is shameless.
This time, again, it made an error.
The @CPhill' solutions are copy-paste Google AI solutions (of its just old outdated version),
but there is one essential difference.
Every time, Google AI makes a note at the end of its solutions that Google AI is experimental
and can make errors/mistakes.
All @CPhill' solutions are copy-paste of Google AI solutions, with one difference:
@PChill never makes this notice and never says that his solutions are copy-past that of Google.
So, he NEVER SAYS TRUTH.
Every time, @CPhill embarrassed to tell the truth.
But I am not embarrassing to tell the truth, as it is my duty at this forum.
And the last my comment.
When you obtain such posts from @CPhill, remember, that NOBODY is responsible for their correctness,
until the specialists and experts will check and confirm their correctness.
Without it, their reliability is ZERO and their creadability is ZERO, too.
.
Find the volumes of the solids generated by revolving the regions bounded by the graphs about the given lines:
y = sqrt(x), y=0, x=3, and x=9
(a) about the x=axis,
(b) about the y-axis,
(c) about the line at x=3,
(d) and about the line at x=9.
Use integration and washer/disk method. I have already solved about the x-axis to be 9/2 pi.
~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~
In the post by @CPhill, part (c) is solved incorrectly.
I came to bring a correct solution for part (c).
I will use the "shell" method, which suits this problem
MUCH BETTER than the "washer/disk" method.
We can present the solid body in this case as a set of thin vertical cylindrical shells
with the axis of cylindrical shells x=3.
In this case, each shell has the length along y-axis from y=0 to y = and the radius (x-3),
so the volume of the solid body is
V = integral from 3 to 9 of ,
Integration gives the antiderivative
F(x) = 2pi*((2/5)*x^(5/2) - 2*x^(3/2)),
and we should calculate the difference
F(9) - F(3) = [ 2pi*((2/5)*9^(5/2) - 2*9^(3/2)) ] - [ 2pi*((2/5)*3^(5/2)-2*3^(3/2)) ] =
= - =
= = = = 297.5523 approximately.
ANSWER. The volume of the solid is , or about 297.5523 cubic units, approximately.
Solved correctly.
The formula from the @CPhill solution gives the numerical value of
= = 101.6620
which is totally wrong.
I'm somewhat surprised by the clumsiness of the instruction. It recommends
using a washer/disk method, which is ill-suited for this case.
Apparently, the instruction was written by someone with little or no knowledge of the subject.
\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\
Regarding the post by @CPhill . . .
Keep in mind that @CPhill is a pseudonym for the Google artificial intelligence.
The artificial intelligence in solving Math problems is in the experimental stage of development
and it is far from to be a well-tuned.
It can make mistakes and produce nonsense.
It has no feeling of shame - it is shameless.
This time, again, it made an error.
The @CPhill' solutions are copy-paste Google AI solutions (of its just old outdated version),
but there is one essential difference.
Every time, Google AI makes a note at the end of its solutions that Google AI is experimental
and can make errors/mistakes.
All @CPhill' solutions are copy-paste of Google AI solutions, with one difference:
@PChill never makes this notice and never says that his solutions are copy-past that of Google.
So, he NEVER SAYS TRUTH.
Every time, @CPhill embarrassed to tell the truth.
But I am not embarrassing to tell the truth, as it is my duty at this forum.
And the last my comment.
When you obtain such posts from @CPhill, remember, that NOBODY is responsible for their correctness,
until the specialists and experts will check and confirm their correctness.
Without it, their reliability is ZERO and their creadability is ZERO, too.