Converting partial derivative w.r.t. T to partial derivative w.r.t. 1/T

Click For Summary
SUMMARY

The discussion centers on the mathematical identity relating the partial derivative with respect to temperature (T) and the partial derivative with respect to the inverse temperature (1/T). The identity is established as T * (∂/∂T) = (-1/T) * (∂/∂(1/T)). The derivation utilizes the chain rule and demonstrates that the operator identity holds for any suitable function g(T), confirming the validity of the transformation. The conclusion emphasizes the importance of understanding operator identities in calculus.

PREREQUISITES
  • Understanding of partial derivatives and operator notation
  • Familiarity with the chain rule in calculus
  • Knowledge of functions and their transformations
  • Basic concepts of mathematical analysis
NEXT STEPS
  • Study the application of the chain rule in multivariable calculus
  • Explore operator theory in calculus and differential equations
  • Learn about the implications of operator identities in physics
  • Investigate the relationship between temperature and thermodynamic functions
USEFUL FOR

Students and professionals in mathematics, physics, and engineering who are dealing with thermodynamic equations and operator calculus will benefit from this discussion.

knulp
Messages
6
Reaction score
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.
 
Physics news on Phys.org
[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?]


The operator identity holds by definition if, when acting on suitable functions, both sides of the identity give the same result. So in my understanding it is not quite right to conclude the operator identiy from only having shown that when acting on F they give the same result. However you can easily cure this. It is just the chain rule. Let g(T) be some function, F(T) = 1/T,. then

<br /> \frac{\partial g}{\partial T} = \frac{\partial F}{\partial T}\frac{\partial g}{\partial F} = -\frac{1}{T^2}\frac{\partial g}{\partial F}<br />

This is true for any suitable function g so

<br /> \frac{\partial }{\partial T} = -\frac{1}{T^2}\frac{\partial }{\partial F}<br />

or

<br /> T\frac{\partial }{\partial T} = -\frac{1}{T}\frac{\partial }{\partial (1/T)}<br />
 
Last edited:
Thanks, it makes complete sense now. So simple, doh!
 

Similar threads

  • · Replies 1 ·
Replies
1
Views
1K
Replies
9
Views
2K
Replies
10
Views
3K
  • · Replies 28 ·
Replies
28
Views
3K
  • · Replies 4 ·
Replies
4
Views
2K
  • · Replies 5 ·
Replies
5
Views
1K
  • · Replies 4 ·
Replies
4
Views
2K
  • · Replies 53 ·
2
Replies
53
Views
4K
  • · Replies 8 ·
Replies
8
Views
2K
  • · Replies 1 ·
Replies
1
Views
2K