Correct way to write multiple argument functions

Click For Summary

Discussion Overview

The discussion revolves around the notation used in the Euler Lagrange equation and the implications of listing multiple arguments for functions, particularly in the context of dependent and independent variables. Participants explore the historical context, mathematical conventions, and physical interpretations related to this notation.

Discussion Character

  • Debate/contested
  • Technical explanation
  • Conceptual clarification

Main Points Raised

  • Some participants question whether it is necessary to list both dependent variables (like y(x) and y'(x)) alongside independent variables (like x) when defining a function, suggesting it may imply all need to be provided to determine the function uniquely.
  • Others argue that from a physical perspective, including all variables makes sense as they represent essential parameters in a physical model, even if some are dependent.
  • A participant points out that the notation used in the context of the Lagrangian is consistent with historical practices in mathematics and physics, referencing Noether's work.
  • There is a contention regarding whether certain expressions, like ##\sqrt{1-x^2}##, can be considered equations without explicitly mentioning all variables involved, leading to further debate about the implications of such notation.
  • Some participants express frustration with the ambiguity that arises from this notation, particularly in the context of partial derivatives and the interpretation of variables.
  • There are repeated assertions that eliminating redundant arguments could lead to misunderstandings or absurdities in mathematical expressions.

Areas of Agreement / Disagreement

Participants do not reach a consensus on the necessity or appropriateness of listing dependent variables alongside independent ones. The discussion remains unresolved, with multiple competing views on the implications of such notation.

Contextual Notes

Participants highlight that the discussion is limited by differing interpretations of what constitutes an equation versus a function and the historical context of mathematical notation. There is also an acknowledgment of the ambiguity that arises when interpreting derivatives in relation to multiple arguments.

  • #31
plob said:
You mean that since L is uniquely determined, i.e. single valued, with respect to x, it should be a regular rather than a partial derivative and that is the bad notation?

Yes, that's what I mean, but we really shouldn't call the function "L". The physics approach doesn't introduce a new name for the function created by substituting functions of x for the arguments of L.

Think about what we teach students in secondary school about functions. A function has a domain and co-domain. If two functions have a different domain, they are not the same function. If "L" was the name of a unique function, it would have a unique domain. In the case at hand, the domain of L is triples of real numbers. When we create a different function whose domain is single real numbers, we shouldn't call that function "L" - without apologizing to our classes of secondary school students!

You may find notation like ##\frac{dL}{dx}## used to indicate a "total derivative" of the unnamed function. That notation may be used alongside the notation ##\frac{\partial L}{\partial x}## , which indicates a partial derivative of ##L## with respect to its first argument.
 
  • Like
Likes   Reactions: plob

Similar threads

  • · Replies 36 ·
2
Replies
36
Views
6K
  • · Replies 55 ·
2
Replies
55
Views
9K
  • · Replies 15 ·
Replies
15
Views
5K
  • · Replies 2 ·
Replies
2
Views
2K
  • · Replies 93 ·
4
Replies
93
Views
12K
  • · Replies 5 ·
Replies
5
Views
2K
  • · Replies 1 ·
Replies
1
Views
3K
Replies
7
Views
2K
  • · Replies 17 ·
Replies
17
Views
3K
  • · Replies 3 ·
Replies
3
Views
2K