knulp
- 6
- 0
Hi, I have a question about a certain step in the following problem/derivation, which you'll see in square brackets:
Show that T * (\partial/ \partialT) = (-1/T) * (\partial/ \partial(1/T))
["\partial/\partialT" is the operator that takes the partial derivative of something with respect to T]
Showing that this is true is a little tricky. For example, we can define F = 1/T. Then (\partialF/ \partialT) = -1/T^2 and (\partialF/ \partialF) = 1. So we can write
(\partialF/ \partialT) = (-1/T^2) (\partialF/ \partialF).
[In the next step he drops the F, so it's now an operator for an arbitrary function, but still with respect to F… Is this really okay?]
(\partial/ \partialT) = (-1/T^2)(\partial/ \partialF)
= (-1/T^2) (\partial/ \partial(1/T)).
Multiplying by T, T(\partial/ \partialT) = (-1/T)(\partial/ \partial(1/T)) and we're done.
Show that T * (\partial/ \partialT) = (-1/T) * (\partial/ \partial(1/T))
["\partial/\partialT" is the operator that takes the partial derivative of something with respect to T]
Showing that this is true is a little tricky. For example, we can define F = 1/T. Then (\partialF/ \partialT) = -1/T^2 and (\partialF/ \partialF) = 1. So we can write
(\partialF/ \partialT) = (-1/T^2) (\partialF/ \partialF).
[In the next step he drops the F, so it's now an operator for an arbitrary function, but still with respect to F… Is this really okay?]
(\partial/ \partialT) = (-1/T^2)(\partial/ \partialF)
= (-1/T^2) (\partial/ \partial(1/T)).
Multiplying by T, T(\partial/ \partialT) = (-1/T)(\partial/ \partial(1/T)) and we're done.