Gradient: \vec F(x'y'z') & g(x,y,z) - Am I Correct?

  • Thread starter Thread starter yungman
  • Start date Start date
  • Tags Tags
    Gradient
Click For Summary

Homework Help Overview

The discussion revolves around the application of the gradient operator to a product involving a vector function \(\vec F(x'y'z')\) and a scalar function \(g(x,y,z)\). Participants are exploring the implications of this operation within the context of vector calculus.

Discussion Character

  • Conceptual clarification, Mathematical reasoning, Assumption checking

Approaches and Questions Raised

  • Participants are examining the validity of the expression \(\nabla(\vec F g) = \vec F \nabla g\) and discussing the nature of the functions involved, particularly whether \(g\) is a scalar function. There is also a focus on the interpretation of products of vectors and the gradient of vector functions.

Discussion Status

Some participants have provided insights into the nature of the operations being discussed, such as the distinction between scalar and vector functions, and the implications of the gradient operator. There is ongoing exploration of different interpretations of vector products and the mathematical definitions involved.

Contextual Notes

Participants are considering the independence of the variables \(x', y', z'\) and \(x, y, z\), as well as the implications of defining vector products in the context of the original question. There is a recognition of potential misunderstandings regarding the gradient of vector functions and the nature of the resulting products.

yungman
Messages
5,741
Reaction score
291
If ##\vec F(x'y'z')## is function of ##(x'y'z')##. ##\nabla## is operator on ##(x,y,z)##.

So:
[tex]\nabla\left[\vec F(x'y'z') g(x,y,z)\right]=(\vec F(x'y'z') \nabla g(x,y,z)[/tex]
or
[tex]\nabla(\vec F g)=\vec F \nabla g[/tex]

Am I correct?
 
Physics news on Phys.org
Is g(x,y,z) a scalar function?

ehild
 
Such tasks are most easily solved using the (Euclidean) Ricci calculus. Your question would read
[tex]\vec{\nabla} \vec{F} g(\vec{x})=\partial_i(F_i g)=F_i \partial_i g=\vec{F} \cdot \vec{\nabla} g,[/tex]
where [itex]\vec{F}=\text{const}[/itex], i.e., independent of [itex]\vec{x}[/itex].
 
  • Like
Likes   Reactions: 1 person
yungman said:
If ##\vec F(x'y'z')## is function of ##(x'y'z')##. ##\nabla## is operator on ##(x,y,z)##.

So:
[tex]\nabla\left[\vec F(x'y'z') g(x,y,z)\right]=(\vec F(x'y'z') \nabla g(x,y,z)[/tex]
or
[tex]\nabla(\vec F g)=\vec F \nabla g[/tex]

Am I correct?
Yes, if x', y', z' and x, y, z are independent variables, that is correct.
 
  • Like
Likes   Reactions: 1 person
ehild said:
Is g(x,y,z) a scalar function?

ehild

Yes.
 
Thanks everyone, I just need to confirm this. I am not a math major, I just encountered all sort of math issues when I am studying antenna theory. This and Electromagnetics really put vector calculus through the ringer! I am sure I'll be posting many more of these kind of stupid questions.

Thanks
 
yungman said:
If ##\vec F(x'y'z')## is function of ##(x'y'z')##. ##\nabla## is operator on ##(x,y,z)##.

So:
[tex]\nabla\left[\vec F(x'y'z') g(x,y,z)\right]=(\vec F(x'y'z') \nabla g(x,y,z)[/tex]
or
[tex]\nabla(\vec F g)=\vec F \nabla g[/tex]

Am I correct?

You would only be correct if you define what you mean by the product ##\vec{A}\vec{B}## for vectors ##A = \vec{F}(x',y',z')## and ##\vec{B} = \vec{\nabla}g(x,y,z)##. Presumably, you mean the outer product, which gives a 3x3 matrix with ##\vec{A}\vec{B}_{i,j} = a_i b_j.## (Of course, ##\vec{F}## could be a vector or other than 3 dimensions, so the matrix could be non-square.)
 
Last edited:
Ray Vickson said:
You would only be correct if you define what you mean by the product ##\vec{A}\vec{B}## for vectors ##A = \vec{F}(x',y',z')## and ##\vec{B} = \vec{\nabla}g(x,y,z)##. Presumably, you mean the outer product, which gives a 3x3 matrix with ##\vec{A}\vec{B}_{i,j} = a_i b_j.## (Of course, ##\vec{F}## could be a vector or other than 3 dimensions, so the matrix could be non-square.)

g is only a scalar function of (x,y,z).
 
^Yes but F and ∇g are vectors so F∇g is the dyad product of F and ∇g.
 
  • #10
lurflurf said:
^Yes but F and ∇g are vectors so F∇g is the dyad product of F and ∇g.

But my original question is
[tex]\nabla(\vec F g)=\vec F \nabla g[/tex]

It's only after the gradient that it become a vector ##\nabla g##, not before.

That actually raise a funny question. If the result is ##\vec F \nabla g##, what is this? A vector multiplying a vector?
 
  • #11
yungman said:
But my original question is
[tex]\nabla(\vec F g)=\vec F \nabla g[/tex]

It's only after the gradient that it become a vector ##\nabla g##, not before.

That actually raise a funny question. If the result is ##\vec F \nabla g##, what is this? A vector multiplying a vector?

It's a tensor product. It's an object with two indices.
 
  • #12
yungman said:
But my original question is
[tex]\nabla(\vec F g)=\vec F \nabla g[/tex]

It's only after the gradient that it become a vector ##\nabla g##, not before.

That actually raise a funny question. If the result is ##\vec F \nabla g##, what is this? A vector multiplying a vector?

Yes, we all know that g is a scalar function.

However, the question is whether or not YOU realize the issues. These are: (1) what do you mean by asking for the gradient of a vector function---that is, what do you mean by ##\vec{\nabla}\vec{G}?##; and (2) what do you mean by the product of two vectors that you wrote, namely, ##\vec{A} \vec{B},## where ##\vec{A} = \vec{F}(x',y',z')## and ##\vec{B} = \vec{\nabla} g(x,y,z)?##
 

Similar threads

  • · Replies 9 ·
Replies
9
Views
2K
Replies
2
Views
2K
  • · Replies 8 ·
Replies
8
Views
2K
  • · Replies 4 ·
Replies
4
Views
2K
  • · Replies 13 ·
Replies
13
Views
4K
Replies
2
Views
2K
  • · Replies 26 ·
Replies
26
Views
3K
  • · Replies 6 ·
Replies
6
Views
3K
  • · Replies 13 ·
Replies
13
Views
1K
Replies
3
Views
2K