Calculating del(1/r) with Separation Vectors: How to Prove the Equation?

  • Thread starter Thread starter boardbox
  • Start date Start date
Click For Summary
The discussion centers on proving the equation del(1/r) = -R/r^2, where R is the separation vector from point (a,b,c) to (x,y,z) and r is its magnitude. A participant struggles with obtaining a 3/2 power in the denominator during calculations. The correct expression for the gradient operator del(1/r) is clarified as -R/[(x-a)² + (y-b)² + (z-c)²]^(3/2). Another contributor points out a mistake in the original equation, emphasizing the need for the unit vector notation. The conversation concludes with acknowledgment of the error and appreciation for the correction.
boardbox
Messages
16
Reaction score
0

Homework Statement


let R be the separation vector from (a,b,c) to (x,y,z) and r be the magnitude of R.
Show that: del(1/r) = -R/r^2

Homework Equations


del is the gradient operator

The Attempt at a Solution


The problem is that I keep getting a 3/2 power in the denominator when I calculate the left hand side.

r = sqrt((x-a)^2 + (y-b)^2 + (z-c)^2)

1/r = ((x-a)^2 + (y-b)^2 + (z-c)^2)^-0.5

del(1/r) = -R/[(x-a)^2 + (y-b)^2 + (z-c)^2]^(3/2)
 
Last edited:
Physics news on Phys.org
I see, you're right. I missed the hat on R in my text. Thanks.
 
Question: A clock's minute hand has length 4 and its hour hand has length 3. What is the distance between the tips at the moment when it is increasing most rapidly?(Putnam Exam Question) Answer: Making assumption that both the hands moves at constant angular velocities, the answer is ## \sqrt{7} .## But don't you think this assumption is somewhat doubtful and wrong?

Similar threads

Replies
2
Views
1K
  • · Replies 9 ·
Replies
9
Views
2K
Replies
1
Views
1K
Replies
14
Views
4K
Replies
3
Views
2K
  • · Replies 9 ·
Replies
9
Views
2K
Replies
1
Views
1K
  • · Replies 2 ·
Replies
2
Views
2K
  • · Replies 9 ·
Replies
9
Views
2K
Replies
3
Views
2K