StevenXClontz’s avatarStevenXClontz’s Twitter Archive—№ 2,198

      1. …in reply to @siwelwerd
        @siwelwerd Flow/work is defined as ∫F·Tds=∫F·dr, so nat defn for flux is ∫F·Nds=∫F/κ·dT. But this measures *inward*! 1/n
        Permalink On twitter.com Twitter logo StevenXClontz’s avatar Mood 0
    1. …in reply to @StevenXClontz
      @siwelwerd So who's the jerk that defined flux as ∫F·nds, where n gives the *outward* unit normals? 2/2
      Permalink On twitter.com Twitter logo StevenXClontz’s avatar Mood -3 🙁
  1. …in reply to @StevenXClontz
    @siwelwerd Also flux= ∫Ndx-Mdy would have nice symmetry with curl·k=N_x-M_y. 3/3
    On twitter.com Twitter logo StevenXClontz’s avatar Mood +3 🙂
    1. …in reply to @StevenXClontz
      @siwelwerd Yeah, weak rant. I do prefer orienting my surfaces with outward unit vectors and orienting my planar regions with k, so it's not all bad.
      Permalink On twitter.com Twitter logo StevenXClontz’s avatar Mood -7 🙁