Evaluating a 'logarithmic' derivative

ausdreamer
Messages
23
Reaction score
0

Homework Statement



I have to evaluate the following integral:

\frac{\partial \log\rho (r)}{\partial \log r}

for

\rho (r) = \rho_0 \Big(1+\big(\frac{r}{\alpha}\big)^2\Big)^\frac{-3 \beta}{2}

where \rho_0,\alpha,\beta are constants and r is a random variable.

Homework Equations



-

The Attempt at a Solution



I've simplified the derivative to

\frac{\partial \log \rho (r)}{\partial \log r} = -\frac{3\beta}{2}\log \Bigg[\rho_0^\frac{-2}{3\beta} \bigg(1+\big(\frac{r}{A}\big)^2\bigg) \Bigg]

but I'm stuck on where to go from here...I've almost finished my physics degree without encountering such a derivative :P
 
Physics news on Phys.org
This comes up a lot in certain fields of research-level physics, but you don't see it that much at undergrad level. Still, it's easy to evaluate using the chain rule:
\frac{\partial}{\partial\log r} = \frac{\partial r}{\partial\log r}\frac{\partial}{\partial r} = \biggl(\frac{\partial\log r}{\partial r}\biggr)^{-1}\frac{\partial}{\partial r}
I'll let you take it from there :wink:

EDIT: actually, your simplification doesn't seem quite right... in any case, I'd recommend starting by using the identity I mentioned. See if that gives you what you need, and if not, post your work in detail.
 
Last edited:
Thread 'Need help understanding this figure on energy levels'
This figure is from "Introduction to Quantum Mechanics" by Griffiths (3rd edition). It is available to download. It is from page 142. I am hoping the usual people on this site will give me a hand understanding what is going on in the figure. After the equation (4.50) it says "It is customary to introduce the principal quantum number, ##n##, which simply orders the allowed energies, starting with 1 for the ground state. (see the figure)" I still don't understand the figure :( Here is...
Thread 'Understanding how to "tack on" the time wiggle factor'
The last problem I posted on QM made it into advanced homework help, that is why I am putting it here. I am sorry for any hassle imposed on the moderators by myself. Part (a) is quite easy. We get $$\sigma_1 = 2\lambda, \mathbf{v}_1 = \begin{pmatrix} 0 \\ 0 \\ 1 \end{pmatrix} \sigma_2 = \lambda, \mathbf{v}_2 = \begin{pmatrix} 1/\sqrt{2} \\ 1/\sqrt{2} \\ 0 \end{pmatrix} \sigma_3 = -\lambda, \mathbf{v}_3 = \begin{pmatrix} 1/\sqrt{2} \\ -1/\sqrt{2} \\ 0 \end{pmatrix} $$ There are two ways...
Back
Top