A scalar field is usually defined as a function which assigns a number to every point in space.(adsbygoogle = window.adsbygoogle || []).push({}); But aren't all equations assigning a number to every point in space?For example, take z = x^2. If I plot it in a 2D graph, I get a line. But if I plot it in a 3D graph, I get a surface. So there I have it, I can safely say this equations defines a scalar field in 2D space.

The point I'm trying to make is this. Every function of one and two variables can be treated as a function of three variables, where the third variable doesn't have any importance. Every curve can be extended into the third dimension to form a surface. So every function is assigning a number to every point in space, and this is a scalar field. Am I right?

**Physics Forums - The Fusion of Science and Community**

Dismiss Notice

Join Physics Forums Today!

The friendliest, high quality science and math community on the planet! Everyone who loves science is here!

The friendliest, high quality science and math community on the planet! Everyone who loves science is here!

# Aren't all equations defining a field?

Loading...

Similar Threads - Aren't equations defining | Date |
---|---|

I What does the vertical line in this equation mean? | Feb 28, 2018 |

I Irrational numbers aren't infinite. are they? | Dec 28, 2016 |

I Inversion of functions that aren't 1-1 | Nov 16, 2016 |

Why aren't these functions the same? | Apr 30, 2013 |

Why aren't mixed ratios allowed in Euclid's Elements ? | May 17, 2012 |

**Physics Forums - The Fusion of Science and Community**