Divergence of (A x B): Proving the Equation for Vector Calculus

  • Thread starter Thread starter r4nd0m
  • Start date Start date
  • Tags Tags
    Divergence
Click For Summary

Homework Help Overview

The discussion revolves around proving the vector calculus identity involving the divergence of the cross product of two vector fields, specifically \(\nabla \cdot (\textbf{A} \times \textbf{B})\). Participants are exploring the mathematical reasoning behind the equation and identifying potential errors in the original poster's approach.

Discussion Character

  • Mathematical reasoning, Assumption checking

Approaches and Questions Raised

  • The original poster attempts to derive the identity by expanding the expressions for the divergence and curl of the vectors involved. Some participants question the manipulation of terms and the application of the product rule in differentiation.

Discussion Status

Participants are actively engaging with the original poster's reasoning, with one participant pointing out a potential misunderstanding regarding the differentiation of products. There is acknowledgment of the need to clarify the application of the product rule, but no consensus has been reached on the specific mistake.

Contextual Notes

The discussion highlights the complexities of vector calculus identities and the importance of careful manipulation of terms during differentiation. The original poster's approach may be constrained by assumptions about the properties of the vectors involved.

r4nd0m
Messages
96
Reaction score
1
Hi, I'm having trouble proving that:
\nabla \cdot (\textbf{A} \times \textbf{B}) = \textbf{B}\cdot<br /> (\nabla \times \textbf{A}) - \textbf{A}\cdot (\nabla \times<br /> \textbf{B})

This is how I proceeded:
\textbf{A} \times \textbf{B} = \overrightarrow{i}(A_y B_z - A_z<br /> B_y) + \overrightarrow{j} (A_z B_x - A_x B_z) + \overrightarrow{k}<br /> (A_x B_y - A_y B_x)

\nabla \cdot (\textbf{A} \times \textbf{B}) = \frac{\partial A_y B_z - A_z<br /> B_y}{\partial x} + \frac{\partial A_z B_x - A_x B_z}{\partial y} +<br /> \frac {\partial A_x B_y - A_y B_x}{\partial z}

\nabla \times \textbf{A} = \overrightarrow{i}(\frac{\partial A_z}{\partial y} - \frac{\partial A_y}{\partial z})<br /> + \overrightarrow{j}(\frac {\partial A_x}{\partial z} - \frac<br /> {\partial A_z}{\partial x}) + \overrightarrow{k}(\frac {\partial<br /> A_y}{\partial x} - \frac {\partial A_x}{\partial y})

\textbf{B} \cdot (\nabla \times \textbf{A}) = (\frac{\partial A_z B_x}{\partial y} - \frac{\partial A_y B_x}{\partial z})<br /> + (\frac {\partial A_x B_y}{\partial z} - \frac {\partial A_z<br /> B_y}{\partial x}) + (\frac {\partial A_y B_z}{\partial x} - \frac<br /> {\partial A_x B_z}{\partial y}) =

= \frac{\partial A_y B_z - A_z<br /> B_y}{\partial x} + \frac{\partial A_z B_x - A_x B_z}{\partial y} +<br /> \frac {\partial A_x B_y - A_y B_x}{\partial z} = \nabla \cdot<br /> (\textbf{A} \times \textbf{B})

\textbf{A} \cdot (\nabla \times \textbf{B}) = (\frac{\partial B_z A_x}{\partial y} - \frac{\partial B_y A_x}{\partial z})<br /> + (\frac {\partial B_x A_y}{\partial z} - \frac {\partial B_z<br /> A_y}{\partial x}) + (\frac {\partial B_y A_z}{\partial x} - \frac<br /> {\partial B_x A_z}{\partial y}) = -\nabla \cdot (\textbf{A} \times<br /> \textbf{B})

Which finally yields:
\textbf{B}\cdot (\nabla \times \textbf{A}) - \textbf{A}\cdot (\nabla \times \textbf{B}) = 2\nabla \cdot (\textbf{A} \times \textbf{B})

Where did I make a mistake?
 
Last edited:
Physics news on Phys.org
The obvious problem is that you've written B.(\/xA) and somehow got the components of the B's past the differential symbols, which is worrying

B_x\partial_yA_z

is not the same as

\partial_yA_zB_x

though it is the same as

(\partial_yA_z)B_x

that might be one problem.
 
Thanks a lot, I didn't realize that.
 
It's just the product rule. if you differentiate f(x)g(x) the answer is not f'(x)g'(x), which I'm sure you do know.
 

Similar threads

  • · Replies 7 ·
Replies
7
Views
2K
  • · Replies 9 ·
Replies
9
Views
3K
  • · Replies 9 ·
Replies
9
Views
2K
  • · Replies 11 ·
Replies
11
Views
4K
Replies
4
Views
1K
  • · Replies 3 ·
Replies
3
Views
1K
  • · Replies 3 ·
Replies
3
Views
755
  • · Replies 5 ·
Replies
5
Views
2K
  • · Replies 2 ·
Replies
2
Views
1K
  • · Replies 9 ·
Replies
9
Views
2K