Calculating Divergence of a Gradient in Cartesian Coordinates

Join the discussion
Ask a follow-up here, or get your own question answered by working scientists, mathematicians and engineers — people, not an autocomplete.
Real named experts · corrections over time · the nuance an AI answer skips
9 replies · 2K views
NewtonApple
Messages
45
Reaction score
0

Homework Statement


image024.gif

Homework Equations



The Attempt at a Solution


(a)[/B] Divergence of a gradient is a Laplacian.

(b) I suppose to do it in Cartesian coordinates.

Let [itex]\nabla=\hat{i}\frac{\partial}{\partial x}+\hat{j}\frac{\partial}{\partial y}+\hat{k}\frac{\partial}{\partial z}[/itex]

and [itex]\overrightarrow{r}=x\hat{i}+y\hat{j}+z\hat{k}, \mid r\mid=\sqrt{x^{2}+y^{2}+z^{2}}[/itex],

[itex]\hat{r}=\hat{i}+\hat{j}+\hat{k}[/itex]

First calculate [itex]\nabla\left(\frac{1}{\overrightarrow{r}}\right)=\nabla\left(\frac{1}{\mid r\mid\hat{r}}\right)=\nabla\left(\frac{1}{\mid r\mid}\hat{r}\right)=\left[\hat{i}\frac{\partial}{\partial x}+\hat{j}\frac{\partial}{\partial y}+\hat{k}\frac{\partial}{\partial z}\right]\left[\frac{\hat{i}+\hat{j}+\hat{k}}{\sqrt{x^{2}+y^{2}+z^{2}}}\right][/itex]

[itex]= \hat{i}\frac{\partial}{\partial x}\left(x^{2}+y^{2}+z^{2}\right)^{\frac{-1}{2}}+\hat{j}\frac{\partial}{\partial y}\left(x^{2}+y^{2}+z^{2}\right)^{\frac{-1}{2}}+\hat{k}\frac{\partial}{\partial z}\left(x^{2}+y^{2}+z^{2}\right)^{\frac{-1}{2}}[/itex]

Am I doing it the right way?

PS. cross posted at
https://www.physicsforums.com/threads/laplacian-of-a-vector.789514/#post-4959007
 
on Phys.org
NewtonApple said:

Homework Statement


View attachment 77030

Homework Equations



The Attempt at a Solution


(a)[/B] Divergence of a gradient is a Laplacian.

(b) I suppose to do it in Cartesian coordinates.

Let [itex]\nabla=\hat{i}\frac{\partial}{\partial x}+\hat{j}\frac{\partial}{\partial y}+\hat{k}\frac{\partial}{\partial z}[/itex]

and [itex]\overrightarrow{r}=x\hat{i}+y\hat{j}+z\hat{k}, \mid r\mid=\sqrt{x^{2}+y^{2}+z^{2}}[/itex],

[itex]\hat{r}=\hat{i}+\hat{j}+\hat{k}[/itex]

First calculate [itex]\nabla\left(\frac{1}{\overrightarrow{r}}\right)=\nabla\left(\frac{1}{\mid r\mid\hat{r}}\right)=\nabla\left(\frac{1}{\mid r\mid}\hat{r}\right)=\left[\hat{i}\frac{\partial}{\partial x}+\hat{j}\frac{\partial}{\partial y}+\hat{k}\frac{\partial}{\partial z}\right]\left[\frac{\hat{i}+\hat{j}+\hat{k}}{\sqrt{x^{2}+y^{2}+z^{2}}}\right][/itex]

[itex]= \hat{i}\frac{\partial}{\partial x}\left(x^{2}+y^{2}+z^{2}\right)^{\frac{-1}{2}}+\hat{j}\frac{\partial}{\partial y}\left(x^{2}+y^{2}+z^{2}\right)^{\frac{-1}{2}}+\hat{k}\frac{\partial}{\partial z}\left(x^{2}+y^{2}+z^{2}\right)^{\frac{-1}{2}}[/itex]

Am I doing it the right way?

PS. cross posted at
https://www.physicsforums.com/threads/laplacian-of-a-vector.789514/#post-4959007

No. ##\hat{r}## is a vector, so ##\nabla(\hat{r}/r)## does not make sense: you need to take the gradient of a scalar, not of a vector. Anyway, why do you define ##\hat{r}=\hat{i}+\hat{j}+\hat{k}##? I cannot see its relation to anything in the problem. If by ##\hat{r}## you mean the unit vector in the direction of ##\vec{r}##, then that is most certainly not equal to what you wrote.

Also, never, never write something like ##\frac{1}{|r|\hat{r}}## because that is meaningless: it is a fraction of the form 1/vector, and those things do not exist in any usual form.
 
Dear Isaac,

If you yourself write ##\vec r = \hat {\bf r} | {\bf r}|## you really should go back to ##\vec {r}=x\hat{i}+y\hat{j}+z\hat{k}, \mid r\mid=\sqrt{x^{2}+y^{2}+z^{2}}## and correct the hideous ##\hat{r}=\hat{\imath}+\hat{\jmath}+\hat{k}## to ##\hat{r}={x\over \sqrt{x^{2}+y^{2}+z^{2}}} \hat{\imath} + {y\over \sqrt{x^{2}+y^{2}+z^{2}}}\hat{\jmath} + {z\over \sqrt{x^{2}+y^{2}+z^{2}}}\hat{k}##

[edit] sorry, pressed wrong button.

But, as Ray (And TSny) indicate, you don't need ##\hat r##

In your defence: The original problem formulation is confusing because it uses a boldface r in the 1/r. Many of us are conditioned to see that as a vector.
 
BvU said:
Dear Isaac,

If you yourself write ##\vec r = \hat {\bf r} | {\bf r}|## you really should go back to ##\vec {r}=x\hat{i}+y\hat{j}+z\hat{k}, \mid r\mid=\sqrt{x^{2}+y^{2}+z^{2}}## and correct the hideous ##\hat{r}=\hat{\imath}+\hat{\jmath}+\hat{k}## to ##\hat{r}={x\over \sqrt{x^{2}+y^{2}+z^{2}}} \hat{\imath} + {y\over \sqrt{x^{2}+y^{2}+z^{2}}}\hat{\jmath} + {z\over \sqrt{x^{2}+y^{2}+z^{2}}}\hat{k}##

[edit] sorry, pressed wrong button.

But, as Ray (And TSny) indicate, you don't need ##\hat r##

In your defence: The original problem formulation is confusing because it uses a boldface r in the 1/r. Many of us are conditioned to see that as a vector.

Dear BvU, I think Author referred it as a vector. In the book (Mathematical Methods for Physicists by Tai L. Chow) scalars are mentioned as non bold, such as in same exercise page other problems are

image004.gif

image020.gif
 
Ok, thanks for the input.

Homework Statement



Show that [itex]\nabla^{2}\left(\frac{1}{r}\right)=0[/itex]

Homework Equations



Let [itex]\nabla=\hat{i}\frac{\partial}{\partial x}+\hat{j}\frac{\partial}{\partial y}+\hat{k}\frac{\partial}{\partial z}[/itex]

and [itex]\overrightarrow{r}=x\hat{i}+y\hat{j}+z\hat{k}, \mid r\mid=\sqrt{x^{2}+y^{2}+z^{2}}[/itex]

The Attempt at a Solution



[itex]\nabla\left(\frac{1}{r}\right)=\nabla\left(\frac{1}{\mid r\mid}\right)=\left[\hat{i}\frac{\partial}{\partial x}+\hat{j}\frac{\partial}{\partial y}+\hat{k}\frac{\partial}{\partial z}\right]\left[\frac{1}{\sqrt{x^{2}+y^{2}+z^{2}}}\right][/itex]

[itex]\nabla\left(\frac{1}{r}\right)= \hat{i}\frac{\partial}{\partial x}\left(x^{2}+y^{2}+z^{2}\right)^{-\frac{1}{2}}+\hat{j}\frac{\partial}{\partial y}\left(x^{2}+y^{2}+z^{2}\right)^{-\frac{1}{2}}+\hat{k}\frac{\partial}{\partial z}\left(x^{2}+y^{2}+z^{2}\right)^{-\frac{1}{2}}[/itex]

[itex]\nabla\left(\frac{1}{r}\right)=-\hat{i}\frac{2x}{2}\left(x^{2}+y^{2}+z^{2}\right)^{-\frac{3}{2}}-\hat{j}\frac{2y}{2}\left(x^{2}+y^{2}+z^{2}\right)^{-\frac{3}{2}}-\hat{k}\frac{2z}{2}\left(x^{2}+y^{2}+z^{2}\right)^{-\frac{3}{2}}[/itex]

[itex]\nabla.\nabla\left(\frac{1}{r}\right)=\left(\hat{i}\frac{\partial}{\partial x}+\hat{j}\frac{\partial}{\partial y}+\hat{k}\frac{\partial}{\partial z}\right).\left(-\hat{i}x\left(x^{2}+y^{2}+z^{2}\right)^{-\frac{3}{2}}-\hat{j}y\left(x^{2}+y^{2}+z^{2}\right)^{-\frac{3}{2}}-\hat{k}z\left(x^{2}+y^{2}+z^{2}\right)^{-\frac{3}{2}}\right)[/itex]

[itex]\nabla^{2}\left(\frac{1}{r}\right)=\frac{\partial}{\partial x}\left(-x\left(x^{2}+y^{2}+z^{2}\right)^{-\frac{3}{2}}\right)+\frac{\partial}{\partial y}\left(-y\left(x^{2}+y^{2}+z^{2}\right)\right)+\frac{\partial}{\partial z}-\left(z\left(x^{2}+y^{2}+z^{2}\right)^{-\frac{3}{2}}\right)[/itex]

[itex]\nabla^{2}\left(\frac{1}{r}\right)=-x\left(2x\right)\left(-\frac{3}{2}\right)\left(x^{2}+y^{2}+z^{2}\right)^{-\frac{5}{2}}-\left(x^{2}+y^{2}+z^{2}\right)^{-\frac{3}{2}}-y\left(2y\right)\left(-\frac{3}{2}\right)\left(x^{2}+y^{2}+z^{2}\right)^{-\frac{5}{2}}[/itex]
[itex]- \left(x^{2}+y^{2}+z^{2}\right)^{-\frac{3}{2}}-z\left(2z\right)\left(-\frac{3}{2}\right)\left(x^{2}+y^{2}+z^{2}\right)^{-\frac{5}{2}}-\left(x^{2}+y^{2}+z^{2}\right)^{-\frac{3}{2}}[/itex]

[itex]\nabla^{2}\left(\frac{1}{r}\right)=3x^{2}\left(x^{2}+y^{2}+z^{2}\right)^{-\frac{5}{2}}-\left(x^{2}+y^{2}+z^{2}\right)^{-\frac{3}{2}}+3y^{2}\left(x^{2}+y^{2}+z^{2}\right)^{-\frac{5}{2}}-\left(x^{2}+y^{2}+z^{2}\right)^{-\frac{3}{2}}[/itex]
[itex]+3z^{2}\left(x^{2}+y^{2}+z^{2}\right)^{-\frac{5}{2}}-\left(x^{2}+y^{2}+z^{2}\right)^{-\frac{3}{2}}[/itex]

[itex]\nabla^{2}\left(\frac{1}{r}\right)=3\left(x^{2}+y^{2}+z^{2}\right)\left(x^{2}+y^{2}+z^{2}\right)^{-\frac{5}{2}}-3\left(x^{2}+y^{2}+z^{2}\right)^{-\frac{3}{2}}[/itex]

[itex]\nabla^{2}\left(\frac{1}{r}\right)=3\left(x^{2}+y^{2}+z^{2}\right)^{-\frac{5}{2}+1}-3\left(x^{2}+y^{2}+z^{2}\right)^{-\frac{3}{2}}[/itex]

[itex]\nabla^{2}\left(\frac{1}{r}\right)=3\left(x^{2}+y^{2}+z^{2}\right)^{-\frac{3}{2}}-3\left(x^{2}+y^{2}+z^{2}\right)^{-\frac{3}{2}}[/itex][itex]\nabla^{2}\left(\frac{1}{r}\right)=0[/itex]

Hence Showed
 
Last edited:
Yes, but we've to it in both - Cartesian and Spherical coordinates.
 
NewtonApple said:
Yes, but we've to it in both - Cartesian and Spherical coordinates.

^ solve it
 
image024.gif


Solving part (c). As suggested above it's also a misprint. It should be
[itex]\overrightarrow{r}.\left(\nabla.\overrightarrow{r}\right)\neq\left(r\nabla\right)r[/itex]