Join TSR now and get all your revision questions answeredSign up now

Differentiating a Vector Field Watch

    • Thread Starter
    Offline

    0
    ReputationRep:
    Hi,

    Just need a bit of help with differentiating a vector field.

     F= (ax^2 +bxy +cy^2 -2x)\bold{i} +(x^2 +xy-y^2 +bz)\bold{j}+(2y+2z)\bold{k}

    I need to find \nabla F

    I am unsure what to differentiate with respect to as i need to have a vector as the outcome. Do I differentiate w.r.t x for i, w.r.t y for j, and w.r.t to z for k?

    Any help is appreciated.
    • PS Helper
    Offline

    2
    If F = \begin{pmatrix}F_1 \\ F_2 \\ F_3 \end{pmatrix} is a vector then \nabla F = \begin{pmatrix} \nabla F_1 \\ \nabla F_2 \\ \nabla F_3 \end{pmatrix} is a matrix, not a vector, where (for instance) \nabla F_1 = (\partial_x F_1, \partial_y F_1, \partial_z F_1).

    If you were differentiating the \mathbf{i}-component w.r.t. x and the \mathbf{j}-component w.r.t. y and so on then what you'd have would be \nabla \cdot F and not \nabla F.
    • Thread Starter
    Offline

    0
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by nuodai)
    If F = \begin{pmatrix}F_1 \\ F_2 \\ F_3 \end{pmatrix} is a vector then \nabla F = \begin{pmatrix} \nabla F_1 \\ \nabla F_2 \\ \nabla F_3 \end{pmatrix} is a matrix, not a vector, where (for instance) \nabla F_1 = (\partial_x F_1, \partial_y F_1, \partial_z F_1).

    If you were differentiating the \mathbf{i}-component w.r.t. x and the \mathbf{j}-component w.r.t. y and so on then what you'd have would be \nabla \cdot F and not \nabla F.
    Okay, thank you. Thats a big help because the question is to find the values a,b,c such that F is soleneidal. i.e. \nabla \cdot F=0
    • PS Helper
    Offline

    2
    (Original post by HappyHammer15)
    Okay, thank you. Thats a big help because the question is to find the values a,b,c such that F is soleneidal. i.e. \nabla \cdot F=0
    Right. Bear in mind that \nabla \cdot F is the sum of the respective derivatives of the components, so it's not a vector. (I didn't make this clear in my last post.)
    • Thread Starter
    Offline

    0
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by nuodai)
    Right. Bear in mind that \nabla \cdot F is the sum of the respective derivatives of the components, so it's not a vector. (I didn't make this clear in my last post.)
    Okay thank you, however, in this example i do not get a variable c in the \nabla \cdot F. Thank you for your help thus far.
    Offline

    2
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by HappyHammer15)
    Okay thank you, however, in this example i do not get a variable c in the \nabla \cdot F. Thank you for your help thus far.
    So?
    • Thread Starter
    Offline

    0
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by around)
    So?
    I get a=-0.5 and b = 2. Is c an arbitrary constant then?
    Offline

    2
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by nuodai)
    Right. Bear in mind that \nabla \cdot F is the sum of the respective derivatives of the components, so it's not a vector. (I didn't make this clear in my last post.)
    To add to this: remember that the notation is suggestive and \nabla \cdot F is formally like a dot product. i.e. think of \nabla = (\frac{\partial}{\partial x},\frac{\partial}{\partial y}, \frac{\partial}{\partial z}) and and F=(F_{\textbf{i}},F_{\textbf{j}}  ,F_{\textbf{k}}) where in your example F_{\textbf{k}} = 2y+2z and so on.

    Then, you form the 'dot product'

     \displaystyle \nabla \cdot F = \left( \frac{\partial}{\partial x},\frac{\partial}{\partial y}, \frac{\partial}{\partial z} \right) \cdot (F_{\textbf{i}},F_{\textbf{j}},F  _{\textbf{k}}) = \left( \frac{\partial}{\partial x}F_{\textbf{i}}+\frac{\partial}  {\partial y}F_{\textbf{j}}+\frac{\partial}  {\partial z}F_{\textbf{k}} \right)
    where you interpret the 'product' of, say \frac{\partial}{\partial x} with F_{\textbf{i}} in the obvious way i.e. you take the partial derivative of F_{\textbf{i}} w.r.t. x
    Offline

    2
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by HappyHammer15)
    I get a=-0.5 and b = 2. Is c an arbitrary constant then?
    Exactly, if it doesn't contribute anything then you can take any value.

    e.g. Find all pairs (a,b) such that a = 0.
    • Thread Starter
    Offline

    0
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by Jake22)
    To add to this: remember that the notation is suggestive and \nabla \cdot F is formally like a dot product. i.e. think of \nabla = (\frac{\partial}{\partial x},\frac{\partial}{\partial y}, \frac{\partial}{\partial z}) and and F=(F_{\textbf{i}},F_{\textbf{j}}  ,F_{\textbf{k}}) where in your example F_{\textbf{k}} = 2y+2z and so on.

    Then, you form the 'dot product'

     \displaystyle \nabla \cdot F = \left( \frac{\partial}{\partial x},\frac{\partial}{\partial y}, \frac{\partial}{\partial z} \right) \cdot (F_{\textbf{i}},F_{\textbf{j}},F  _{\textbf{k}}) = \left( \frac{\partial}{\partial x}F_{\textbf{i}},\frac{\partial}  {\partial y}F_{\textbf{j}},\frac{\partial}  {\partial z}F_{\textbf{k}} \right)
    where you interpret the 'product' of, say \frac{\partial}{\partial x} with F_{\textbf{i}} in the obvious way i.e. you take the partial derivative of F_{\textbf{i}} w.r.t. x

    If i do it in this way i get a very complicated solution that is quite difficult to reduce. Will the way in which i first did it suffice?, i.e F_{\textbf{i}} differentiating w.r.t x, F_{\textbf{j}} differentiating w.r.t y and so on.
    Offline

    2
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by HappyHammer15)
    If i do it in this way i get a very complicated solution that is quite difficult to reduce. Will the way in which i first did it suffice?, i.e F_{\textbf{i}} differentiating w.r.t x, F_{\textbf{j}} differentiating w.r.t y and so on.
    I never wrote that you should calculate it in any other way... I said to do exactly that i.e. differentiate the i component wrt to x, the j component wrt y etc. and then sum them up. All I wrote was just a convinient way of remembering what the operation \nabla \cdot F gives you. You shouldn't get anything different at all.

    The point is to think of \nabla as a vector and \nabla \cdot F as a kind of dot product of vectors whose formula in components you are (or at least should be) very familiar with. The reason that it isn't a 'true' dot product is that \nabla is a vector in a different vector space to F i.e. the dual space.

    Note: there was a mistake in my initial post which I have now corrected - I put commas instead of + signs on the right hand side but this shouldn't have affected how you would calculate.
    • Thread Starter
    Offline

    0
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by Jake22)
    I never wrote that you should calculate it in any other way... I said to do exactly that i.e. differentiate the i component wrt to x, the j component wrt y etc. and then sum them up. All I wrote was just a convinient way of remembering what the operation \nabla \cdot F gives you. You shouldn't get anything different at all.

    Note: there was a mistake in my initial post which I have now corrected - I put commas instead of + signs on the right hand side.
    Okay, i see now. I was reading  \nabla =\nabla F and i was trying to compute \nabla F \cdot F
    This seems like such a silly mistake to make now. Thanks for all of your help though.
 
 
 
Poll
Is GoT overrated?
Useful resources

Make your revision easier

Maths

Maths Forum posting guidelines

Not sure where to post? Read the updated guidelines here

Equations

How to use LaTex

Writing equations the easy way

Student revising

Study habits of A* students

Top tips from students who have already aced their exams

Study Planner

Create your own Study Planner

Never miss a deadline again

Polling station sign

Thinking about a maths degree?

Chat with other maths applicants

Can you help? Study help unanswered threads

Groups associated with this forum:

View associated groups

The Student Room, Get Revising and Marked by Teachers are trading names of The Student Room Group Ltd.

Register Number: 04666380 (England and Wales), VAT No. 806 8067 22 Registered Office: International House, Queens Road, Brighton, BN1 3XE

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