Differentiating Vector v = ai + bxj: What Does it Mean?

  • Context: Undergrad 
  • Thread starter Thread starter atavistic
  • Start date Start date
  • Tags Tags
    Vector
Click For Summary

Discussion Overview

The discussion revolves around the differentiation of a vector expressed as v = ai + bxj, focusing on the implications of differentiating vector components, the application of the chain rule, and the interpretation of acceleration in relation to vector directions and magnitudes. Participants explore both mathematical and physical interpretations, raising questions about the correctness of their approaches and the underlying physics.

Discussion Character

  • Technical explanation
  • Conceptual clarification
  • Debate/contested
  • Mathematical reasoning

Main Points Raised

  • One participant applies the chain rule to differentiate the vector and questions whether vector directions should be considered or if only magnitudes matter.
  • Another participant presents a mathematical expression involving derivatives and partial derivatives of the vector components, but does not clarify the physical implications.
  • A participant expresses confusion about the physical meaning of a being zero, seeking clarification beyond mathematical expressions.
  • One participant acknowledges a mistake in their previous differentiation approach and attempts to correct it by applying the chain rule to the vector components separately.
  • Some participants suggest that differentiating magnitudes alone is insufficient, citing examples like centripetal motion where acceleration is present despite constant speed.
  • There are discussions about the use of polar coordinates and the variability of basis vectors, with some arguing that magnitudes cannot fully characterize motion in higher dimensions.
  • One participant reiterates their initial question about the meaning of the vector a and its constancy, indicating uncertainty in understanding the vector's role.

Areas of Agreement / Disagreement

Participants express differing views on the appropriateness of differentiating magnitudes versus considering vector directions. There is no consensus on the correct approach to take when differentiating the vector or interpreting the results.

Contextual Notes

Participants highlight limitations in their understanding of the relationship between vector components and their physical interpretations, particularly in higher-dimensional motion. There are unresolved questions regarding the assumptions made about the constancy of variables and the implications of using different coordinate systems.

Who May Find This Useful

This discussion may be of interest to students and practitioners in physics and mathematics, particularly those exploring vector calculus, motion in multiple dimensions, and the application of differentiation in physical contexts.

atavistic
Messages
105
Reaction score
0
I have a vector v = a i +bxj

Now I want to find a.So I apply chain rule and differentiate dv/dx * dx/dt = bj * Vx = bj*ai ??

Now what does this mean? Is this allright? Should I not care about the vector directions when differentiating and just use the magnitudes a = ab , if yes then why? And what will be the direction of the acceleration then?
 
Physics news on Phys.org
Hmm...

[tex]d/dt = \mathbf{v}\cdot \nabla[/tex]

[tex] \frac{d\mathbf{v}}{dt} = \frac{\partial v_x}{\partial x}\frac{dx}{dt} + \frac{\partial v_y}{\partial y}\frac{dy}{dt}[/tex]
and we know that

[tex]\frac{dx}{dt} = a, \frac{dy}{dt} = bx, \frac{\partial v_x}{\partial x} = 0, \frac{\partial v_y}{\partial y} = 0[/tex]

and then you get...
 
I don't get what you have written. Please tell me the physics and not just the math. How can a be zero ?
 
Last edited:
Hold on a second I did it wrong, didn't I? No one corrected me yet...

[tex]\frac{dv_x}{dt} = \frac{\partial v_x}{\partial x}\frac{dx}{dt} + \frac{\partial v_x}{\partial y}\frac{dy}{dt}[/tex]

[tex]\frac{dv_y}{dt} = \frac{\partial v_y}{\partial x}\frac{dx}{dt} + \frac{\partial v_y}{\partial y}\frac{dy}{dt}[/tex]

Which is just applying the chain rule to the components of v separately. Now that should make sense, it didn't before because it was wrong.
 
[tex]a_x = 0[/tex]

[tex]a_y = ab[/tex]

I'm sorry about my stupidity.
 
just differentiate the magnitudes. derivatives does not effect the basis vectors. so you write the related basis vector after the derivation. and it will give you the direction of the acceleration.
 
torehan said:
just differentiate the magnitudes.

That's wrong. Consider the counterexample-- centripetal motion. The speed is constant in time, so by your method you would conclude that acceleration is 0, but it's not.

And in this problem, differentiating the magnitude would also give you the wrong answer.
 
that's not totally wrong. if you should use "the polar coordinate" system and then you can find the direction.
 
torehan said:
that's not totally wrong. if you should use "the polar coordinate" system and then you can find the direction.

No, the polar coordinate basis vectors are not constant.

Face it, once you leave 1 dimensional motion, you can not characterize position, velocity and acceleration by their magnitudes.
 
  • #10
atavistic said:
I have a vector v = a i +bxj

Now I want to find a.So I apply chain rule and differentiate dv/dx * dx/dt = bj * Vx = bj*ai ??

Now what does this mean? Is this allright? Should I not care about the vector directions when differentiating and just use the magnitudes a = ab , if yes then why? And what will be the direction of the acceleration then?

I'm not sure I understand, is a a constant? what do you understand by the vector a ?
 

Similar threads

  • · Replies 3 ·
Replies
3
Views
3K
  • · Replies 39 ·
2
Replies
39
Views
6K
  • · Replies 3 ·
Replies
3
Views
2K
  • · Replies 16 ·
Replies
16
Views
4K
  • · Replies 10 ·
Replies
10
Views
3K
  • · Replies 1 ·
Replies
1
Views
2K
  • · Replies 31 ·
2
Replies
31
Views
3K
  • · Replies 17 ·
Replies
17
Views
2K
  • · Replies 8 ·
Replies
8
Views
2K
  • · Replies 2 ·
Replies
2
Views
1K