Directional Derivative of F: Same for V & 2V?

Click For Summary

Discussion Overview

The discussion revolves around the concept of the directional derivative of a scalar function F at a point 'a' in the directions of vectors V and 2V. Participants explore whether these directional derivatives yield the same result or differ based on the definitions provided in various sources, including Wikipedia.

Discussion Character

  • Debate/contested
  • Technical explanation

Main Points Raised

  • One participant questions if the directional derivatives in the directions V and 2V are the same, referencing the Wikipedia definition that suggests they may differ.
  • Another participant argues that the directional derivatives are indeed the same, providing a mathematical derivation that shows the expressions for both derivatives simplify to the same form.
  • A third participant seeks clarification on the Wikipedia definition, noting that it references a standard definition and questions whether it is flawed.
  • Some participants express skepticism about the Wikipedia definition, suggesting it may allow for misleading interpretations regarding the values of directional derivatives based on the choice of vector magnitudes.
  • One participant highlights that the interpretation of the directional derivative can depend on whether one is looking for a normalized direction or simply the derivative along a given vector.

Areas of Agreement / Disagreement

Participants do not reach a consensus on the correctness of the Wikipedia definition or whether the directional derivatives in the directions V and 2V are the same. Multiple competing views remain regarding the interpretation and implications of the definitions provided.

Contextual Notes

There are unresolved questions regarding the assumptions made about the normalization of direction vectors and the implications of using non-normalized vectors in the definition of directional derivatives.

seeker101
Messages
28
Reaction score
0
A very basic question:
Is the directional derivative of a scalar function F at some point 'a' in the direction V the same as the directional derivative of F at 'a' in the direction 2V?

Going by http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Directional_derivative#Definition" definition of a directional derivative (using a non-normalized direction vector), they appear to be different!
 
Last edited by a moderator:
Physics news on Phys.org


seeker101 said:
A very basic question:
Is the directional derivative of a scalar function F at some point 'a' in the direction V the same as the directional derivative of F at 'a' in the direction 2V?

Going by http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Directional_derivative#Definition" definition of a directional derivative (using a non-normalized direction vector), they appear to be different!
?? The vectors V and 2V have the same direction. I cannot find anywhere on the Wikipedia page that implies thee directional derivative will be different.
For any vector V, the derivative of f in the direction of vector V is
[tex]\frac{\nabla f \cdot V}{||V||}[/itex]<br /> Of course, for vector 2V that becomes <br /> [tex]\frac{\nabla f \cdot 2V}{||2V||}= \frac{2\nabla f \cdot V}{2||V||}= \frac{\nabla f \cdot V}{||V||}[/tex]<br /> exactly the same as before.[/tex]
 
Last edited by a moderator:


So, are you saying http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Directional_derivative#Definition" is flawed? (I'm familiar with the (standard) definition you have mentioned above. But I just wanted to clarify the definition used on that wiki page - which btw references Apostol's Analysis text)

The definition of a directional derivative given there is:
[tex]\nabla_{\vec{v}}f(\vec{x})=\nabla f(\vec{x}) \cdot \vec{v}[/tex]

The wiki page goes on to say: "Usually directions are taken to be normalized, so [tex]\vec{v}[/tex] is a unit vector, although the definition above works for arbitrary vectors."

Wouldn't this mean
[tex]\nabla_{2\vec{v}}f(\vec{x})=\nabla f(\vec{x}) \cdot 2\vec{v}[/tex]?
 
Last edited by a moderator:


It certainly seems to be flawed. The way they have it written, it looks to me like, by an appropriate choice of |v|, you can make just about any directional derivative equal to any number you want. Except, well, for perpendicular directions, in which case that formula will actually give the correct answer for v, 2v, 3v, etc.

I mean, you can obviously see the Wiki page is wrong. I'm sure it happens more than you'd think.
 


It depends what you want it to mean. If I just want "the derivative in the direction of v", then I would divide by the norm of v.

But sometimes you actually want "the derivative along v", in which case you want distinct answers for v, 2v, 3v, etc.
 

Similar threads

  • · Replies 6 ·
Replies
6
Views
3K
  • · Replies 4 ·
Replies
4
Views
3K
  • · Replies 8 ·
Replies
8
Views
4K
  • · Replies 3 ·
Replies
3
Views
2K
  • · Replies 8 ·
Replies
8
Views
3K
  • · Replies 14 ·
Replies
14
Views
2K
  • · Replies 15 ·
Replies
15
Views
3K
  • · Replies 11 ·
Replies
11
Views
3K
  • · Replies 4 ·
Replies
4
Views
2K
  • · Replies 4 ·
Replies
4
Views
3K