How can gradient be zero if its a normal vector?

aaryan0077
Messages
69
Reaction score
0
Physical interpretation of gradient says that its a vector normal to equipotential (or level) surface \phi(x,y,z) = 0
but what about other surfaces, say the surface which are not equipotential?
This is my first question.

ok, now
as grad \phi is a vector normal to surface it can't be 0. Because that would mean that surface have no normal vector, or say a normal vector of indeterminate direction (as 0 vector is of indeterminate direction). how can it be possible that a surface has no normal vector, more specifically a 0 vector as its normal vector?
But I have seen many examples in which grad \phi is 0.
So doesn't that contradicts the assumption that grad \phi is a normal vector?
 
Mathematics news on Phys.org
Equipotential surfaces are defined by the eqution:
\phi(x,y,z) = C (C is constant)
But consider the contant potential field ,say \phi(x,y,z) = 2,can you find a unique equipotential surface for it?
 
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...
Fermat's Last Theorem has long been one of the most famous mathematical problems, and is now one of the most famous theorems. It simply states that the equation $$ a^n+b^n=c^n $$ has no solutions with positive integers if ##n>2.## It was named after Pierre de Fermat (1607-1665). The problem itself stems from the book Arithmetica by Diophantus of Alexandria. It gained popularity because Fermat noted in his copy "Cubum autem in duos cubos, aut quadratoquadratum in duos quadratoquadratos, et...
Thread 'Imaginary Pythagorus'
I posted this in the Lame Math thread, but it's got me thinking. Is there any validity to this? Or is it really just a mathematical trick? Naively, I see that i2 + plus 12 does equal zero2. But does this have a meaning? I know one can treat the imaginary number line as just another axis like the reals, but does that mean this does represent a triangle in the complex plane with a hypotenuse of length zero? Ibix offered a rendering of the diagram using what I assume is matrix* notation...
Back
Top