I was looking at this PDF (http://www.ifi.unicamp.br/~maplima/fi001/2012/aula20b.pdf) showing the derivation of the squared-angular momentum operator. Everything seems okay although I am just slightly lost in how exactly B.31 was derived. Isn't B.31 equal to the dot product of B.24 with itself? Where exactly does the sin in the numerator and denominator in B.31 come from when the theta component of B.24 is simply the partial derivative with respect to theta with no other terms? Shouldn't the theta components dotted with each simply yield the second order partial derivative with respect to theta when considering only this component?(adsbygoogle = window.adsbygoogle || []).push({});

**Physics Forums - The Fusion of Science and Community**

Dismiss Notice

Join Physics Forums Today!

The friendliest, high quality science and math community on the planet! Everyone who loves science is here!

The friendliest, high quality science and math community on the planet! Everyone who loves science is here!

# Derivation of B.31

Loading...

Similar Threads - Derivation | Date |
---|---|

I Deriving a function from within an integral with a known solution | Yesterday at 9:35 PM |

I Derivative and Parameterisation of a Contour Integral | Feb 7, 2018 |

I Why does this concavity function not work for this polar fun | Jan 26, 2018 |

I Euler Lagrange formula with higher derivatives | Jan 24, 2018 |

I Derivative of infinitesimal value | Jan 15, 2018 |

**Physics Forums - The Fusion of Science and Community**