How Do Tangents Relate to Partial Derivatives in Griffith's E&M Derivation?

  • Thread starter Thread starter darkchild
  • Start date Start date
  • Tags Tags
    Derivation E&m
Click For Summary

Homework Help Overview

The discussion revolves around the relationship between tangents and partial derivatives in the context of wave mechanics as presented in a textbook. The original poster expresses confusion regarding the transition from tangents of angles to partial derivatives, questioning the connection between the geometric interpretation of tangents and their application in calculus. Additionally, there is concern about the legitimacy of a step in the derivation involving second partial derivatives.

Discussion Character

  • Conceptual clarification, Assumption checking

Approaches and Questions Raised

  • Participants explore the geometric interpretation of tangents in relation to derivatives, considering the definition of tangent in trigonometry and its connection to the slope of curves. There is also discussion about the mathematical soundness of manipulating limits in derivative definitions and the implications of small intervals in calculus.

Discussion Status

The conversation is ongoing, with participants providing insights into the nature of derivatives and approximations. Some guidance has been offered regarding the relationship between small changes in variables and their effects on derivatives, but no consensus has been reached on the original poster's questions.

Contextual Notes

Participants are navigating the complexities of calculus definitions and their applications in physics, particularly in the context of wave mechanics. The original poster's reference to a specific textbook page indicates a reliance on external material, which may limit the discussion's scope.

darkchild
Messages
153
Reaction score
0

Homework Statement


Please see the attached pdf file, which is the bottom of page 365 from the 3rd edition of the book. This is a lesson about (generalized) waves, and f(z,t) is the vertical displacement of the medium at point z, time t. F is net force and T is the tension on the string in the picture.

I don't understand how we get from the tangents of angles to partial derivatives in this derivation. I've asked a professor about this before, and he said something about tangent lines to curves being connected to derivatives, but it didn't make sense because the tangent line to a curve is a different use of tangent than what I have here, tangent the trig function. Is there some connection between the two?

Also, the last step (from first to second partial derivatives) seems too hand wavy to be legitimate.

Homework Equations



None for my first question.

For my second question, I understand that it involves the definition of the derivative:

[tex]\lim_{\Delta z \to 0} \frac{\frac{\partial f(z+ \Delta z)}{\partial t} - <br /> \frac{\partial f(z)}{\partial t}}{\Delta z} = \frac{\partial^{2} f}{\partial t^{2}}[/tex]

What I'm not sure about is if it's mathematically sound to just multiply both sides of that equation by [tex]\Delta z[/tex], seeing as how one side has a limit.

The Attempt at a Solution



I have no idea.
 

Attachments

Physics news on Phys.org
darkchild said:

Homework Statement




I don't understand how we get from the tangents of angles to partial derivatives in this derivation. I've asked a professor about this before, and he said something about tangent lines to curves being connected to derivatives, but it didn't make sense because the tangent line to a curve is a different use of tangent than what I have here, tangent the trig function. Is there some connection between the two?

Also, the last step (from first to second partial derivatives) seems too hand wavy to be legitimate.

Homework Equations



None for my first question.


I'm responding to your first question. Then I'll look at your second question.

Consider the definition of the trig tangent when you are looking at a right triangle. Its tangent equals opposite over adjacent.

Now consider the derivative expressed as

[tex]\frac{dy}{dx}[/tex]

for a curve increasing from left to right. (imagine a parabola) Draw a tangent to the curve at some point P. What is the slope of the tangent? It's the change in y over the change in x, or
[tex]\frac{dy} {dx}[/tex] which is the "opposite", dy, over the "adjacent", dx. (Draw in little lines to represent the change in dy and dx to make this clear, if you need to ).
 
darkchild said:
For my second question, I understand that it involves the definition of the derivative:

[tex]\lim_{\Delta z \to 0} \frac{\frac{\partial f(z+ \Delta z)}{\partial t} - <br /> \frac{\partial f(z)}{\partial t}}{\Delta z} = \frac{\partial^{2} f}{\partial t^{2}}[/tex]

What I'm not sure about is if it's mathematically sound to just multiply both sides of that equation by [tex]\Delta z[/tex], seeing as how one side has a limit.

Surely you mean

[tex]\lim_{\Delta z \to 0} \frac{\frac{\partial f(z+ \Delta z)}{\partial z} - <br /> \frac{\partial f(z)}{\partial z}}{\Delta z} = \frac{\partial^{2} f}{\partial z^{2}}[/tex]

...right? :wink:

Anyways, the point is, that for sufficiently small [itex]\Delta z[/itex], you have

[tex]\lim_{\Delta z \to 0} \frac{\frac{\partial f(z+ \Delta z)}{\partial z} - <br /> \frac{\partial f(z)}{\partial z}}{\Delta z} \approx\frac{\frac{\partial f(z+ \Delta z)}{\partial z} - <br /> \frac{\partial f(z)}{\partial z}}{\Delta z}[/tex]

In other words, the slope of the line connecting the point [tex](z,\frac{\partial f(z)}{\partial z}})[/itex] to the point [tex](z+\Delat z,\frac{\partial f(z+\Delta z)}{\partial z}})[/itex] is approximately equal to the tangent to the curve [tex]\frac{\partial f(z)}{\partial z}}[/itex] at the point [tex](z,\frac{\partial f(z)}{\partial z}})[/itex][/tex][/tex][/tex][/tex]
 
Last edited:
gabbagabbahey said:
Surely you mean

Yes, that's what I meant.

Anyways, the point is, that for sufficiently small [itex]\Delta z[/itex], you have

[tex]\lim_{\Delta z \to 0} \frac{\frac{\partial f(z+ \Delta z)}{\partial z} - <br /> \frac{\partial f(z)}{\partial z}}{\Delta z} \approx\frac{\frac{\partial f(z+ \Delta z)}{\partial z} - <br /> \frac{\partial f(z)}{\partial z}}{\Delta z}[/tex]

I don't understand why that is a legitimate approximation. If [tex]\Delta z[/tex] is small, why wouldn't we say instead that the expression becomes large or approaches infinity?
 
darkchild said:
I don't understand why that is a legitimate approximation. If [tex]\Delta z[/tex] is small, why wouldn't we say instead that the expression becomes large or approaches infinity?

If [tex]\Delta z[/tex] is small, then so is the difference [tex]\frac{\partial f(z+ \Delta z)}{\partial z} - <br /> \frac{\partial f(z)}{\partial z}[/tex]...one small number, divided by another small number can easily produce finite result.

Think about the relationship between speed and position in one-dimension...the exact speed of a particle at time [itex]t[/itex] is given by [tex]v(t)=\frac{dx}{dt}=\lim_{\Delta t\to 0}\frac{x(t+\Delta t)-x(t)}{\Delta t}[/itex]...but if you measure the average speed over some very small time interval from [itex]t[/itex] to [itex]t+\Delta t[/itex], [tex]v_{av}=\frac{x(t+\Delta t)-x(t)}{\Delta t}[/tex] would you not expect it to be close to the exact speed at time [itex]t[/itex]?[/tex]
 
gabbagabbahey said:
If [tex]\Delta z[/tex] is small, then so is the difference [tex]\frac{\partial f(z+ \Delta z)}{\partial z} - <br /> \frac{\partial f(z)}{\partial z}[/tex]...one small number, divided by another small number can easily produce finite result.

Oh, I see. In that case, my question is: Why assume or focus on the case in which [tex]\Delta z[/tex] is small?
 
darkchild said:
Oh, I see. In that case, my question is: Why assume or focus on the case in which [tex]\Delta z[/tex] is small?


You are ultimately interested in finding the displacement of the string at any point along its length at any given time...looking at the difference in tension (force) over very small intervals [itex]\Delta z[/itex] allows you to determine the average acceleration that small piece of the string experiences at any given time...in the limit that [itex]\Delta z\to 0[/itex], you thus determine the exact acceleration of each point along the string, and hence you can then find the displacement of every point along the string (at any given point in time).
 

Similar threads

  • · Replies 9 ·
Replies
9
Views
2K
Replies
2
Views
2K
Replies
4
Views
2K
Replies
15
Views
3K
Replies
7
Views
6K
  • · Replies 4 ·
Replies
4
Views
2K
  • · Replies 0 ·
Replies
0
Views
2K
  • · Replies 3 ·
Replies
3
Views
2K
Replies
4
Views
5K
  • · Replies 12 ·
Replies
12
Views
3K