Results are out! Find what you need...fast. Get quick advice or join the chat
x

Unlock these great extras with your FREE membership

  • One-on-one advice about results day and Clearing
  • Free access to our personal statement wizard
  • Customise TSR to suit how you want to use it

Prove the differential of a scalar multiple of a vector field

Announcements Posted on
Find your uni forum to get talking to other applicants, existing students and your future course-mates 27-07-2015
  1. Offline

    ReputationRep:


    I don't understand what I need to do to answer this question, because to me it looks like the proof is just stating the product rule - but for five marks that obviously isn't enough!

    Can anyone explain what I should do?
  2. Offline

    ReputationRep:
    What, exactly, is the definition of this "product rule" you wish to use?

    [Either you're saying it's "sort of like the product rule, but they are actually different", or the product rule you wish to use is exactly what you need here, in which case you need to prove it].
  3. Offline

    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by DFranklin)
    What, exactly, is the definition of this "product rule" you wish to use?

    [Either you're saying it's "sort of like the product rule, but they are actually different", or the product rule you wish to use is exactly what you need here, in which case you need to prove it].
    Oh, uh, I meant that the product rule is exactly what I think I need. So I'm right in thinking that, but need to prove that it applies here? I don't think I can prove that though.
  4. Offline

    ReputationRep:
    I might have a proof, but I'm not sure if it's valid. I tried writing Phi as an unknown function or x, y and z, and u as a column vector of 3 more unknown 3D functions. Then I expanded Div[(Phi)(u)] using the product rule on each term - so I had a new column vector with two terms in each direction. Is that allowed, since each entry was a function, but not a vector?

    Then I rearranged things to show that the result was equivalent to the proof desired, the result being applicable to n-dimensional space since since the operations involved were all independent of number of dimensions.

    Does that work? It feels like I'm assuming things I shouldn't.

    In any case, just to check, the later formula in the question, is correctly interpreted as stating that the rate of change of fluid density in a given volume is equal to the rate of flow of fluid in or out of the volume, no?
  5. Offline

    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by 99wattr89)
    I might have a proof, but I'm not sure if it's valid. I tried writing Phi as an unknown function or x, y and z, and u as a column vector of 3 more unknown 3D functions. Then I expanded Div[(Phi)(u)] using the product rule on each term - so I had a new column vector with two terms in each direction. Is that allowed, since each entry was a function, but not a vector?

    Then I rearranged things to show that the result was equivalent to the proof desired, the result being applicable to n-dimensional space since since the operations involved were all independent of number of dimensions.

    Does that work? It feels like I'm assuming things I shouldn't.

    In any case, just to check, the later formula in the question, is correctly interpreted as stating that the rate of change of fluid density in a given volume is equal to the rate of flow of fluid in or out of the volume, no?
    Why do you have a column vector after you have "worked out" the Div. The Divergence is a scalar.

    This is easiest to do with summation convention. Have you seen this before.

    Then the first part would be

    div(\psiu) =  \frac{\partial}{\partial x_i}(\psi u_i)
  6. Offline

    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by thebadgeroverlord)
    Why do you have a column vector after you have "worked out" the Div. The Divergence is a scalar.

    This is easiest to do with summation convention. Have you seen this before.

    Then the first part would be

    div(\psiu) =  \frac{\partial}{\partial x_i}(\psi u_i)
    Because I am a very silly person and I put the terms in a column instead of summing. xD

    Also, I do know that notation, and I see exactly how the general proof should go now, thank you!

Reply

Submit reply

Register

Thanks for posting! You just need to create an account in order to submit the post
  1. this can't be left blank
    that username has been taken, please choose another Forgotten your password?
  2. this can't be left blank
    this email is already registered. Forgotten your password?
  3. this can't be left blank

    6 characters or longer with both numbers and letters is safer

  4. this can't be left empty
    your full birthday is required
  1. By joining you agree to our Ts and Cs, privacy policy and site rules

  2. Slide to join now Processing…

Updated: July 6, 2012
TSR Support Team

We have a brilliant team of more than 60 Support Team members looking after discussions on The Student Room, helping to make it a fun, safe and useful place to hang out.

Poll
Would you consider Clearing if you missed your offer?
Results and Clearing

Results are coming...

No sweat. Here's all you need to make sure you're ready

new on tsr

What's your life ambition?

Graduating, travelling, owning a business?

Study resources
x

Think you'll be in clearing or adjustment?

Hear direct from unis that want to talk to you

Get email alerts for university course places that match your subjects and grades. Just let us know what you're studying.

Quick reply
Reputation gems: You get these gems as you gain rep from other members for making good contributions and giving helpful advice.