Differences between Del Operators at Field/Source Points

  • Context: Undergrad 
  • Thread starter Thread starter newbie101
  • Start date Start date
  • Tags Tags
    Del Operators Points
Click For Summary

Discussion Overview

The discussion centers on the differences between the del operator applied to field points and source points, particularly in the context of Helmholtz theorem and its derivation. Participants explore the implications of these operators in relation to scalar and vector fields, as well as their mathematical representations.

Discussion Character

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

Main Points Raised

  • Some participants clarify that the del operator can be applied differently depending on whether it is used with respect to field points or source points, as indicated in the referenced text.
  • One participant explains that the operator 'del-f' differentiates with respect to the field point, while 'del-s' differentiates with respect to the source point, providing mathematical expressions for both.
  • Another participant notes that a vector function V is analogous to the Green's function, which depends on both field and source coordinates, while a function F(rs) depends solely on the source point.
  • There is a question raised about the nature of partial derivatives with respect to different coordinates, specifically how dV/dXf differs from dV/dXs, given that they seem to refer to the same three-dimensional space.
  • Participants discuss the concept of the source being distributed over a volume rather than located at a single point, which affects the interpretation of the electric field's dependence on the source location.

Areas of Agreement / Disagreement

Participants express varying levels of understanding regarding the application of the del operator and the implications of field versus source points. There is no consensus on the nuances of the partial derivatives and their implications, indicating ongoing uncertainty and exploration of the topic.

Contextual Notes

The discussion references specific equations and concepts from a textbook, which may introduce limitations based on the assumptions made in those contexts. The mathematical steps and definitions involved in the differentiation process remain unresolved.

newbie101
Messages
16
Reaction score
0
Hello All,

May I know what is the difference between
1) Del operator with respect for field point
2) Del operator with respect to source point

thanks
newbie
 
Physics news on Phys.org
newbie,

Not sure what you mean.

Del is an operation on a scalar that gives a vector (namely, the gradient of the scalar)

What are the "field" and "source" that you're talking about?
 
I am quite certain that he is confused by the convention of regarding the divergence of a source potential as a multiple of dirac's delta function.

However, only newbie knows for sure..
 
Hi All,

thanks for helping.. let me explain
i'm reading this text on the derivation of helmholtz theorem

let me just quote directly from the book

HelmholtzPage1.jpg


HelmholtzPage2.jpg



Page 2 top half
" In Equations (A-2) through (A-5), the operator 'del-f' differentiates with respect to field point rf, while the operator 'del-s' differentiates with repect to the source point rs"

May I know the difference between the operators here.


Page 2 bottom half
" From Equation (A-1) since F(rs) is a function of the source point alone, but "del-f" differentiates with respect to the field point... "

Well apparently we can move F(rs) out of the lapacian here. Please help explain how this is possible

thanks again
newbie101
 
Last edited:
newbie101 said:
page 2 top half
" In Equations (A-2) through (A-5), the operator 'del-f' differentiates with respect to field point rf, while the operator 'del-s' differentiates with repect to the source point rs"

That means that, for example,

[tex]\nabla_f V = \frac {\partial V}{\partial x_f} \hat {\bold i} + \frac {\partial V}{\partial y_f} \hat {\bold j} + \frac {\partial V}{\partial z_f} \hat {\bold k}[/tex]

whereas

[tex]\nabla_s V = \frac {\partial V}{\partial x_s} \hat {\bold i} + \frac {\partial V}{\partial y_s} \hat {\bold j} + \frac {\partial V}{\partial z_s} \hat {\bold k}[/tex]

where V is some function of [itex]x_f[/itex], [itex]y_f[/itex], [itex]z_f[/itex], [itex]x_s[/itex], [itex]y_s[/itex], and [itex]z_s[/itex] (that is, depends on both the field coordinates and the source coordiates).
 
jtbell,

So your vector V is analogous to the Green's function G(rs,rf) since it's a function of both rs and rf. But since F(rs) is a function only of rs, it doesn't vary with rf, so when derivatives are taken wrt rf, F acts like a constant.

newbie, does that help at all, or am I missing your point entirely?
 
jtbell & jdavel,

yes it does explain everything if vector V here is a function of both (x,y,z) at field point and (x,y,z) at source point... which should be the case

since the E field at a point would depend on both
1) where the field point is as well as
2) where the source is


however, I am still not understanding the partial derivative here ... i mean how is dV/dXf different from dV/dXs ... arent there only 3 axis here X,Y,Z so the gradient whould still be the same wouldn't it ?

thanks again all
newbie101

** if necessary, i can scan more pages **

BTW the book is "Numerical Computation of Electric and Magnetic Fields" by Charles W Stelle
 
newbie101 said:
since the E field at a point would depend on both
1) where the field point is as well as
2) where the source is

newbie, When you say "the E field at a point would depend on...where the source is" it sounds like you think the source is located at a single point. That's not true here; the source is distributed over the entire volume.
 
Yes the source is distributed. Thanks jdavel
 

Similar threads

  • · Replies 1 ·
Replies
1
Views
4K
  • · Replies 3 ·
Replies
3
Views
4K
  • · Replies 2 ·
Replies
2
Views
2K
  • · Replies 14 ·
Replies
14
Views
4K
Replies
3
Views
2K
  • · Replies 3 ·
Replies
3
Views
4K
  • · Replies 2 ·
Replies
2
Views
2K
  • · Replies 13 ·
Replies
13
Views
2K
  • · Replies 4 ·
Replies
4
Views
2K
  • · Replies 2 ·
Replies
2
Views
5K