Area of Surface of Revolution
The surface of a solid of revolution is called the surface of revolution.
Our goal is to calculate the area of a surface of revolution.
We have not defined what exactly the area of a shape on a plane means,
and the area of a surface in 3D is even more difficult to define.
Instead of defining it properly, I'll make a couple assumptions about how areas behave during the derivations.
Cone area
Consider a cone with radius and side length .

Any cone can be created from a piece of paper cut to the shape of a sector of a circle.

Now the area of the cone, not including its red bottom circle, is the area of this circle sector.
When folding the circle sector, its radius becomes the side length of the cone, so that's ,
and its arc length becomes the perimeter of the cone, which is .

Because is the perimeter of the entire circle, the ratio
describes how much of an entire circle this sector is.
For example, if we had of a circle, then , and the area of the cone would be
In general, we have
The area of a cone with side length and bottom radius , not including the bottom circle, is .
Area of surface of revolution
Consider the surface of revolution created by rotating the graph about the axis on ,
where is a number between and .
Let denote the area of this surface.

Our goal is to calculate , the area between and .
For doing this, we first calculate the derivative
We calculate only the right limit
because a similar calculation works for the corresponding left limit.
Let be a positive number.
Consider the area of the "slice" between and (green).

Because is the area between and ,
including (yellow) and the area of the slice (blue), we have
The slice looks almost like a part of a cone:

Here's what it looks like from the side:

From this view, it's easy to see that the slice is not actually a slice of the cone when the graph is curved.
This means that the area of the slice of our surface of revolution
can be different than the area of the corresponding slice of a cone.
But for this derivation, we assume that we get the correct limit even if we use a cone slice area instead.
This is yet another assumption about how areas work, and
having to make this assumption is a downside of deriving the area formula this way.
Now we see a cone consisting of the cone slice we are interested in and a smaller cone.
Let denote the side length of the smaller cone, and let .
In the pictures, we have a positive , because .

By the Pythagorean theorem, the side length of the bigger cone is .
The radiuses of the cones are and , so their areas are and .
The difference of these areas is
The two triangles have two same angles
(90 degrees in bottom right and the angle at their left corner),
so the ratios of corresponding sides are the same (TODO), and we get
This gives , so
We assumed that , but this also works if , and the derivation for that case is similar.
If , we have a cylinder with radius and height instead of cones, and the area of the cylinder is
So, the above equation works for all values of , and now we get
With limit rules and continuity of square root, we get
Here
is the derivative of , assuming it exists. Also, if is continuous, we have
By putting all this together, we get
With part 2 of the fundamental theorem of calculus, we now get
Because is the area between and , it's zero,
and the above integral is , the area between and .
For this to work, must be continuous on ,
and for that, it's enough for and to be continuous on .
Because a function that has a derivative is continuous (TODO),
it is enough to assume that exists and is continuous on .
Suppose that a function has a derivative that is continuous on ,
and assume that for all .
Then the area of the solid of revolution of on is

Example: area of cone (again)
Just like in this example,
we get a cone with height and radius when
the graph rotates about the axis on .

By plugging in and , we get
By letting denote the side length, we get as expected.
Example: area of ball
Just like in this example,
we get a ball of radius as the curve rotates about the axis on .

The derivative of the function is
where we used derivative of square root
and chain rule.
This is undefined when or ,
but if , then the derivative exists and is continuous on .
The corresponding area is not the area of the entire ball, but only a part of it.

This area is
To get the area of the entire ball, we can take limits with and , and we get
The area of a ball with radius is .
The area is somewhat surprisingly 4 times the corresponding circle area.
For different ways to derive this, see this 3blue1brown video.
Example: area and volume with
Let . Consider the "horn" created by as it rotates about the axis on .

The volume of this solid of revolution is
This is always less than , no matter how long the horn is.
On the other hand, because
the area of the surface of revolution is
Calculating this integral is difficult, but because ,
we have , and so
and we get
Because , the area is greater than .
By choosing a long enough horn (that is, a large enough ),
we can make as big as we want, and hence make the area as big as we want.
For example, if you want the area to be greater than ,
you can choose , which gives
This also works for any other positive number instead of .
Now consider the infinitely long horn of rotating on .
- The infinitely long horn has finite volume.
Any finitely long part of the horn has volume less than ,
so the total volume can't be greater than .
- The infinitely long horn has infinite area.
If its area was finite,
then a finitely long part of it would have an even bigger area,
which is impossible.
The area of an object can be infinite even if the volume is finite.
This result feels weird.
From the above calculations, you can see that
this is essentially the weirdness of how
antiderivative of
splits into two different cases depending on whether is or something else.
Like most other "weird" results in mathematics,
this result involves an object that does not exist in the real world,
because any actual horn in the real world is only finitely long.