Calculate Exterior Differentials: Step-by-Step Guide

  • Context: Graduate 
  • Thread starter Thread starter Zurtex
  • Start date Start date
  • Tags Tags
    Differential
Click For Summary

Discussion Overview

The discussion revolves around calculating exterior differentials, specifically focusing on the application of the exterior derivative to expressions involving differential forms. Participants explore the rules and properties of exterior differentiation, including the anticommutativity of the wedge product and the implications of differentiating certain forms.

Discussion Character

  • Technical explanation
  • Mathematical reasoning
  • Debate/contested

Main Points Raised

  • One participant presents an expression for exterior differentiation and questions its correctness, suggesting a possible simplification.
  • Another participant explains the relationship between differentials and the wedge product, indicating that the differential of a differential is zero and providing a simplified expression for the original problem.
  • A participant inquires about the generation of differentials when exterior differentiating a specific form, questioning whether only one differential is produced.
  • A follow-up response clarifies the calculation of the exterior derivative, emphasizing the anticommutativity of the wedge product and detailing the steps involved in the differentiation process.
  • One participant expresses gratitude for the assistance received in the discussion.

Areas of Agreement / Disagreement

Participants engage in a technical exploration of exterior differentials, with some points of clarification provided, but no consensus is reached on the initial question posed. The discussion includes multiple perspectives on the rules governing exterior differentiation.

Contextual Notes

The discussion includes assumptions about the properties of differential forms and the application of the wedge product, which may not be fully articulated by all participants. Some steps in the calculations are left unresolved or simplified.

Zurtex
Science Advisor
Homework Helper
Messages
1,118
Reaction score
1
Hey, having a little problem with a question because I am a little to unsure how to do it, I've been asked to calculate some exterior differentials, would this be write:

[tex]d\left(r^3 (\cos (4 \theta) dr - r \sin (4\theta) d\theta)\right)[/tex]

Simplified:

[tex]d\left(r^3 \cos (4\theta) dr - r^4 \sin (4\theta) d\theta\right)[/tex]

Goes to:

[tex]2r^3 dr \left(-4 \sin (4\theta) d\theta dr - 4r^3 dr \cos (4\theta) d\theta d\theta \right) = 0[/tex]

Am I even slightly right?
 
Physics news on Phys.org
Note that if p and q are k-forms, then [itex]dp\wedge dq = -dq\wedge dp[/itex] which leads to [itex]dp\wedge dp = 0[/itex] and the differential follows the product rule. Thus we get:
[tex]d\left(r^3 \cos (4\theta) dr - r^4 \sin (4\theta) d\theta\right)[/tex]
[tex]=-4r^3\sin(4\theta)d\theta\wedge dr - 4r^3\sin(4\theta)dr\wedge d\theta[/tex]
= 0.
You could have saved a bit of work by noting that your expression is just
[tex]d(\frac{r^4\cos(4\theta)}{4})[/tex]
since the differential of a differential is zero.
 
When say exterior differentiating [itex]r^3 \cos (4\theta) d\theta[/itex] Does only dr get generated and not an extra [itex]d\theta[/itex]?
 
Zurtex said:
When say exterior differentiating [itex]r^3 \cos (4\theta) d\theta[/itex] Does only dr get generated and not an extra [itex]d\theta[/itex]?
That's due to the anticommutativity of the wedge product. The full calculation is:
[tex]d(r^3 \cos (4\theta) d\theta) = d(r^3\cos(4\theta))\wedge d\theta + (-1)^{1}r^3\cos(4\theta)\wedge d(d\theta))[/tex]
[tex]= (3r^2 \cos(4\theta) dr - 4r^3 \sin(4\theta )d\theta ) \wedge d\theta - 0[/tex]
[tex]= (3r^2 \cos(4\theta)) dr\wedge d\theta - (4r^3 \sin(4\theta )) d\theta\wedge d\theta[/tex]
[tex]= (3r^2 \cos(4\theta)) dr\wedge d\theta - 0[/tex]
Just too much to type out. :wink: if you have a k-form where k is greater than or equal to one, you can decrease your drudge work by just ignoring partials with respect to differentials already present in the form and noticing existing differentials.
All you really need is the anticommutativity, from which can be derived [itex]dp\wedge dp = 0[/itex], the generalized product rule, and d(dp)=0 for any form p.
 
Last edited:
Thanks a lot :smile:
 

Similar threads

  • · Replies 2 ·
Replies
2
Views
3K
Replies
3
Views
4K
  • · Replies 3 ·
Replies
3
Views
5K
  • · Replies 5 ·
Replies
5
Views
4K
  • · Replies 4 ·
Replies
4
Views
2K
  • · Replies 3 ·
Replies
3
Views
3K
  • · Replies 12 ·
Replies
12
Views
5K
  • · Replies 8 ·
Replies
8
Views
2K
  • · Replies 7 ·
Replies
7
Views
4K
Replies
6
Views
3K