Condition of a vector field F being conservative is curl F = 0,

Click For Summary
The discussion centers on the conditions under which a vector field F is considered conservative, specifically addressing the implication of curl F = 0. It is clarified that while curl F = 0 indicates that the field is irrotational, it does not necessarily mean that F is a function of the position vector r. Examples, such as constant vector fields and velocity-dependent fields, illustrate cases where curl F can be zero without the field being conservative. The conversation also highlights that velocity or time-dependent fields typically do not satisfy conservative conditions, despite having zero curl. Overall, the relationship between curl and conservativeness is nuanced and context-dependent.
Kolahal Bhattacharya
Messages
133
Reaction score
1
When we say condition of a vector field F being conservative is curl F=0,does it mean that F=F(r)?.I know normally it does not look so.Please,then site an example where F is not a function of r,but still curl F=0.
 
Physics news on Phys.org
By "curl of F=0" we mean

\nabla_{\vec{r}} \times \vec{F}=0

for an \vec{F}=\vec{F}\left(\vec{r}\right)

If \vec{F}\neq \vec{F}\left(\vec{r}\right) then

\nabla_{\vec{r}} \times \vec{F}\equiv 0
 
Kolahal Bhattacharya said:
When we say condition of a vector field F being conservative is curl F=0,does it mean that F=F(r)?.I know normally it does not look so.Please,then site an example where F is not a function of r,but still curl F=0.

One example: A constant vector field \vec F(x\hat x + y\hat y + z\hat z) = a\hat x + b\hat y + c\hat z has no curl.

The curl of a gradient is necessarily zero:
\vec F(\vec x) = \nabla \phi(\vec x)

So all you need to do is come up with a scalar function \phi(\vec x) that cannot be expressed as a function of ||\vec x||.

The constant vector field corresponds to \phi(\vec x) = ax + by + cz, where \vec x = x\hat x + y\hat y + z\hat z. Then \nabla \phi(\vec x) = a\hat x + b\hat y + c\hat z.
 
Last edited:
I thank you both.And I was not interested about constant fields.
However,What about F=F(v) where v=dr/dt
And also if curl F=0 where F=F(t),or,F=F(v) does it mean the field is conservative?
 
A picked a constant vector field as a simple counterexample. Any vector field that can be expressed as the gradient of a scalar function has zero curl.

For the latter, \vec F = \vec F(\vec v), \vec v = d\vec r/dt, the curl is zero since the partials of \vec F with respect to components of \vec r are zero. Drag in a constant density fluid satisfies these conditions, and is definitely not conservative.
 
D H said:
A picked a constant vector field as a simple counterexample. Any vector field that can be expressed as the gradient of a scalar function has zero curl.

For the latter, \vec F = \vec F(\vec v), \vec v = d\vec r/dt, the curl is zero since the partials of \vec F with respect to components of \vec r are zero. Drag in a constant density fluid satisfies these conditions, and is definitely not conservative.

Unless you're talking about a viscous fluid and \mathbf{v} = \mathbf{v}(\mathbf{r}, t) is the velocity field. But then things are still more complicated.

Generally velocity/time dependent forcing fields are not conservative. I really dislike it when classes take the perspective that if the curl is zero, then it has to be conservative.
 
DH:If F=F(v) has curl F=0,then what do you mean by this?
Drag in a constant density fluid satisfies these conditions, and is definitely not conservative.
StatMechGuy:I really did not understand:
I really dislike it when classes take the perspective that if the curl is zero, then it has to be conservative
 
StatMechGuy said:
Generally velocity/time dependent forcing fields are not conservative. I really dislike it when classes take the perspective that if the curl is zero, then it has to be conservative.

I agree. A zero curl simply means the field is irrotational, period.
 
Kolahal Bhattacharya said:
When we say condition of a vector field F being conservative is curl F=0,does it mean that F=F(r)?.I know normally it does not look so.Please,then site an example where F is not a function of r,but still curl F=0.


A vector field assigns a vector to each point of the "base space": it is a mapping v(p) from the base space M into a vector space V. In the settings where curl and so on make sense, it can be shown that, if curl_p v = 0 over M, AND IF M IS SIMPLY CONNECTED (no "holes"), that there exists a scalar function f(p) over M, such that v(p) = grad f.

Now, nothing stops you from adding extra parameters to this problem. That is, if you consider a "vector field" which is in fact a *family* of vector fields:
v(p,lambda), with p in M, but lambda any other (set of) parameters, such as time or whatever, well the same theorem holds, for each individual member (indicated by lambda) of the family: if curl_p v(p,lambda) = 0 then v(p,lambda) = grad_p f(p,lambda).
 

Similar threads

  • · Replies 5 ·
Replies
5
Views
2K
  • · Replies 6 ·
Replies
6
Views
3K
  • · Replies 1 ·
Replies
1
Views
1K
  • · Replies 8 ·
Replies
8
Views
2K
  • · Replies 1 ·
Replies
1
Views
514
  • · Replies 6 ·
Replies
6
Views
7K
  • · Replies 2 ·
Replies
2
Views
2K
  • · Replies 1 ·
Replies
1
Views
836
  • · Replies 5 ·
Replies
5
Views
1K
  • · Replies 10 ·
Replies
10
Views
772