Gradient of Vector A: What Does It Mean?

  • Thread starter Thread starter enricfemi
  • Start date Start date
  • Tags Tags
    Gradient Vector
enricfemi
Messages
195
Reaction score
0
\nabla\stackrel{\rightarrow}{A}

when a gradient operater act on a vector,what is it stand for ?
 
Physics news on Phys.org
enricfemi said:
\nabla\stackrel{\rightarrow}{A}

when a gradient operater act on a vector,what is it stand for ?

Visually, what you wrote looks like

\nabla_{\vec A}

The title of the thread and your LaTeX suggests you meant

\nabla \vec A

These are two different things. The first is an operator, the gradient with respect to the components of \vec A, rather than the normal gradient which is take with respect to spatial components. The second form is the gradient of a vector. It is a second-order tensor. If \vec A = \sum_k a_k \hat x_k,

(\nabla \vec A)_{i,j} = \frac{\partial a_i}{\partial x_j}

BTW, it is best not to separate things the way you did in the original post. Here is your original equation as-is:

\nabla\stackrel{\rightarrow}{A}

Now look at how this appears when written as a single LaTeX equation:

\nabla\stackrel{\rightarrow}{A}
 
Last edited:
D H said:
The second form is the gradient of a vector. It is a second-order tensor. If \vec A = \sum_k a_k \hat x_k,

(\nabla \vec A)_{i,j} = \frac{\partial a_i}{\partial x_j}

Does this make a matrix using row i and column j for the entries?
 
Yes.
 
Thank you.
 
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