Explanation on Taylor expansions needed

AI Thread Summary
The discussion centers on understanding Taylor expansions in the context of symmetry operations and specific equations from Landau's book. The first equation presented illustrates a Taylor expansion, but the notation is criticized for being ambiguous due to the dual use of 'r'. The second equation relates to expanding a function in powers of a small parameter, where neglecting higher-order terms leads to a simplified expression. Clarifications reveal that the original formula is indeed a valid Taylor series, albeit presented in a confusing manner. Overall, the conversation emphasizes the importance of clear notation in mathematical expressions.
Stalafin
Messages
21
Reaction score
0
I have a question about Taylor expanding functions. For both cases I can't get my head around why things are the way they are. I just don't see how one would perform Taylor expansions like that.

The first:
The starting point of a symmetry operations is the following expansion:
f(r+a) = f(r) + \left(a\cdot\frac{\partial}{\partial r}\right) f(r) + \frac{1}{2} \left(a\cdot\frac{\partial}{\partial r}\right)^2 f(r) + \frac{1}{3!} \left(a\cdot\frac{\partial}{\partial r}\right)^2 f(r) + \ldots

The second:
This one comes from Landau's book, first chapter, fourth section:
Given the equation L = L(v^{\prime 2}) where \boldsymbol{v}^\prime = \boldsymbol{v} + \boldsymbol{\varepsilon} and \boldsymbol{v}^2 = v^2 s.t. L(v^{\prime 2}) = L(v^2 + 2\boldsymbol{v}\boldsymbol{\varepsilon} + \boldsymbol{\varepsilon}^2): why does expanding in powers of \boldsymbol{\varepsilon} and neglecting terms above first order lead to:
<br /> L(v^{\prime 2}) = L(v^2)+\frac{\partial L}{\partial v^2} 2\boldsymbol{v}\cdot \boldsymbol{\varepsilon}<br />


Some insight into why this is would be greatly appreciated. :-)
 
Mathematics news on Phys.org
Okay, the first and the second one are equivalent if I set r=v^2, a=2\boldsymbol{v}\boldsymbol{\varepsilon} and disregard terms \boldsymbol{\varepsilon}^2. I still do not quite see how to get the first equation done properly.

For a normal Taylor expansion (up to first order), we have:
<br /> f(x) = f(c) + (x-c) \frac{\operatorname{d}}{\operatorname{d}x}f(c) + \ldots<br />

If I now identify x=r+a and c=a I recover most of the terms I need, with the exception of \frac{\operatorname{d}}{\operatorname{d}r+a}f(r).

Suggestions?
 
Hi Stalafin! :smile:

Stalafin;3373466 The first: The starting point of a symmetry operations is the following expansion: [tex said:
f(r+a) = f(r) + \left(a\cdot\frac{\partial}{\partial r}\right) f(r) + \frac{1}{2} \left(a\cdot\frac{\partial}{\partial r}\right)^2 f(r) + \frac{1}{3!} \left(a\cdot\frac{\partial}{\partial r}\right)^2 f(r) + \ldots[/tex]

This is an abuse of notation and an abuse that I don't like at all. Basically, this equation has two kind of r's: an r that represents a value and an r that represents a variable.

Rewriting your equation gives us
f(r+a) = f(r) + a\cdot\frac{\partial}{\partial r}f(r) + \frac{1}{2} a^2\cdot\frac{\partial^2}{\partial r^2}f(r) + \frac{1}{3!} a^3\cdot\frac{\partial^3}{\partial r^3} f(r) + \ldots

Because the notation \frac{\partial}{\partial f} sucks (because r is used as a variable there), we will replace it with a better one:

f(r+a) = f(r) + af^\prime(r) + \frac{1}{2} a^2f^{\prime\prime}(r) + \frac{1}{3!} a^3f^{\prime\prime\prime}(r) + \ldots

But this is exactly the Taylor series! So the original formula was correct (but abusive).
 
Suppose ,instead of the usual x,y coordinate system with an I basis vector along the x -axis and a corresponding j basis vector along the y-axis we instead have a different pair of basis vectors ,call them e and f along their respective axes. I have seen that this is an important subject in maths My question is what physical applications does such a model apply to? I am asking here because I have devoted quite a lot of time in the past to understanding convectors and the dual...
Insights auto threads is broken atm, so I'm manually creating these for new Insight articles. In Dirac’s Principles of Quantum Mechanics published in 1930 he introduced a “convenient notation” he referred to as a “delta function” which he treated as a continuum analog to the discrete Kronecker delta. The Kronecker delta is simply the indexed components of the identity operator in matrix algebra Source: https://www.physicsforums.com/insights/what-exactly-is-diracs-delta-function/ by...
Back
Top