Find Steepest Climb of this Hyperbolic Paraboloid

Click For Summary

Homework Help Overview

The discussion revolves around finding the steepest climb of a hyperbolic paraboloid, specifically through the analysis of a defined function and its gradient. The subject area includes multivariable calculus and the properties of level surfaces.

Discussion Character

  • Exploratory, Conceptual clarification, Mathematical reasoning

Approaches and Questions Raised

  • Participants explore the relationship between the gradient of a function and the direction of maximum change. Questions arise regarding the necessity of using unit vectors in relation to the gradient for determining ascent direction.

Discussion Status

The discussion is active, with participants providing insights into the mathematical concepts involved. Some guidance has been offered regarding the calculation of gradients and their implications for direction, though there is a lack of consensus on the interpretation of vector multiplication in this context.

Contextual Notes

There is a mention of potential confusion regarding the application of gradients and unit vectors, indicating a need for clarification on vector operations within the problem's framework.

UziStuNNa
Messages
9
Reaction score
0
Delete please.
 
Last edited:
Physics news on Phys.org
if you define F(x,y,z) = x^2-y^2+z

then the paraboloid is defined by the level surface
F(x,y,z) = 0

the gradient direction represents the direction of maximum change, and will by definition be perpindicular to any level surface.

how about this... consider the function
f(x,y) = z = y^2-x^2

the calculate the 2D gradient
\nabla f = (\frac{\partial f}{\partial x}, \frac{\partial f}{\partial x})

this will represenet the direction of greatest change of z = f(x,y), with x & y and i think it should be easy to relate the slope to the magintude of the gradient
 
Thank you for the help, but one more question...
Do I need to multiply the gradient of F(x,y) by the unit vector to find the direction of greatest ascent?
 
no worries, but the question you asked doesn't really make sense, as the gradient is a vector, so what do you mean multiplying a vector by a vector?

the steps i outlined, you will give you the x,y direction, which direction of greatest ascent & the value of that slope in that direction

if you want to find the unit vector representing the direction on surface, use the x,y direction with the slope to find a vector in that direction (in 3D), then normalise by divding by the vector magnitude

note as a check, the vector you find will be perpindicular to the gradient you gave in you first post
 

Similar threads

  • · Replies 12 ·
Replies
12
Views
2K
  • · Replies 5 ·
Replies
5
Views
2K
Replies
7
Views
3K
  • · Replies 1 ·
Replies
1
Views
1K
Replies
23
Views
7K
  • · Replies 10 ·
Replies
10
Views
2K
  • · Replies 3 ·
Replies
3
Views
3K
  • · Replies 5 ·
Replies
5
Views
3K
  • · Replies 5 ·
Replies
5
Views
2K
  • · Replies 1 ·
Replies
1
Views
4K