Gradients of harmonic functions

Click For Summary

Homework Help Overview

The discussion revolves around properties of harmonic functions and their gradients, specifically addressing the relationships between divergence, curl, and harmonicity. The original poster seeks clarification on the concepts and computations related to these properties.

Discussion Character

  • Conceptual clarification, Mathematical reasoning

Approaches and Questions Raised

  • The original poster attempts to understand the gradient of a harmonic function and its implications for the divergence and curl of a vector field. Some participants explain the relationship between a vector field and a harmonic function, while others question the necessity of computing divergence and curl in this context.

Discussion Status

Participants are exploring the definitions and implications of harmonic functions and their gradients. Some guidance has been offered regarding the computations needed for parts (c) and (d), but confusion remains about the relevance of these computations to the original problem.

Contextual Notes

The original poster has completed parts (a) and (b) but is struggling with parts (c) and (d). There is an emphasis on understanding the relationship between the vector field and the harmonic function, as well as the assumptions underlying the problem.

musicmar
Messages
95
Reaction score
0

Homework Statement


a. show that delφ=div(gradφ) for any function φ.
b. show that φ is harmonic if and only if div(gradφ)=o.
c. Show that if F is the gradient of a harmonic function, then curl(F)=0 and div(F)=0.
d. Show F=<xz,-yz,1/2(x2-y2)> is the gradient of a harmonic function. What is the flux of F through a closed surface?


The Attempt at a Solution


I did parts (a) and (b), but am now stuck on (c) (and thus (d)). Can someone explain to me what the gradient of a harmonic function is and how you find one? Thanks.
 
Physics news on Phys.org
"\mathbf{F} is the gradient of a harmonic function" just means that there exists a harmonic function \varphi (\nabla^2\varphi = 0) such that \mathbf{F} = \nabla \varphi. For part (c), you just need to compute \nabla \times \mathbf{F} and \nabla \cdot \mathbf{F} based on this assumption. For part (d), you need to find a suitable harmonic function \varphi.
 
Why do I need to compute ∇xF and ∇·F? I'm sorry; I'm still confused about what this will tell me and how this relates to φ.
 
Part (c) asks you: if \mathbf{F} is the gradient of a harmonic function, what are \nabla\times\mathbf{F} and \nabla\cdot\mathbf{F}? This means your hypothesis is that there exists some harmonic function \varphi such that \mathbf{F} = \nabla\varphi. You don't know, or need to know, anything about \varphi other than those two facts: that it is harmonic, and that its gradient is \mathbf{F}. From these facts you can draw the conclusions you need, by rewriting \nabla\times\mathbf{F} and \nabla\cdot\mathbf{F} in terms of \varphi.
 

Similar threads

  • · Replies 8 ·
Replies
8
Views
2K
  • · Replies 2 ·
Replies
2
Views
2K
Replies
7
Views
3K
  • · Replies 1 ·
Replies
1
Views
3K
  • · Replies 5 ·
Replies
5
Views
2K
Replies
3
Views
2K
  • · Replies 6 ·
Replies
6
Views
2K
  • · Replies 16 ·
Replies
16
Views
3K
  • · Replies 13 ·
Replies
13
Views
3K
Replies
26
Views
3K