How Do You Differentiate a Vector Function with Respect to Another Vector?

  • Thread starter Thread starter Sorento7
  • Start date Start date
  • Tags Tags
    Differentiate
Click For Summary

Homework Help Overview

The discussion revolves around differentiating a vector function with respect to another vector, specifically focusing on the expression involving the inner product of two vectors. The context includes concepts from vector calculus and the Jacobian matrix.

Discussion Character

  • Exploratory, Mathematical reasoning, Assumption checking

Approaches and Questions Raised

  • Participants explore the differentiation of the expression \(\frac{\vec{a}}{\vec{a} \cdot \vec{b}}\) with respect to \(\vec{a}\), questioning the validity of the differentiation method used. Some participants express confusion over the notation and the representation of the Jacobian.

Discussion Status

There is an ongoing exploration of the problem, with some participants providing clarifications and alternative formulations. A few have attempted to express the function in terms of its components and discuss the implications of treating \(\vec{b}\) as a constant vector.

Contextual Notes

Participants note that \(\vec{b}\) is a constant vector and question whether \(\vec{a}\) is a function of other variables, such as \(x\) and \(y\). There is also mention of the need for clarity in the mathematical expressions being used.

Sorento7
Messages
16
Reaction score
0

Homework Statement



[itex]\frac{∂ \frac{\vec{a}}{ \vec{a} . \vec{b}} }{∂\vec{a}}[/itex]

b is not a function of a

Homework Equations


I want to differentiate this, (the jacobian of the vector field)
dot is the Euclidean inner product.

The Attempt at a Solution


[itex]\acute{u}[/itex].v - [itex]\acute{v}[/itex].u / v2 doesn't seem to work
 
Physics news on Phys.org
To begin with, i could barely see anything with that font size...
[tex]\frac{∂ \frac{\vec{a}}{ \vec{a} . \vec{b}} }{∂\vec{a}}[/tex]
 
[itex]\frac{∂ \frac{\vec{a}}{ \vec{a} . \vec{b}} }{∂\vec{a}}[/itex]
 
no answer? wow I thought that should have been an easy differentiation?
 
It's not a proper differentiation.
I can't make out what your formula is supposed to represent.
It doesn't look like a Jacobian.
 
Maybe I phrased it wrong. Its the result of multiplying inversion of an inner product to one of its vector components. (1/[itex]\vec{a}[/itex].[itex]\vec{b}[/itex]) * [itex]\vec{a}[/itex]

edit: [itex]\vec{b}[/itex] is a constant vector.
 
So is ##\vec a## a function of (x,y) or something?
 
I like Serena said:
So is ##\vec a## a function of (x,y) or something?

Suppose:

F([itex]\vec{a}[/itex]) = (1/[itex]\vec{a}[/itex].[itex]\vec{b}[/itex]) [itex]\vec{a}[/itex]

dot is the Euclidean inner product and F is defined as a vector space(R3 → R3)

I need ∂[itex]\vec{F}[/itex]/∂[itex]\vec{a}[/itex] (given that [itex]\vec{b}[/itex] is an arbitrary constant vector.)
 
Ok, so suppose ##\vec a## is ##[^x_y]##.

Then ##\vec F(\vec a) = \vec F(x, y) = [^{F_x(x,y)}_{F_y(x,y)}]##.

In that case the Jacobian is the 2x2 matrix of the partial derivatives of F.

With your ##\vec F(\vec a) = {\vec a \over \vec a \cdot \vec b}##, you get:
$$\vec F(\vec a) = {[^x_y] \over x b_x + y b_y}$$
From this you can calculate the partial derivatives.

For instance:
$${\partial F_x \over \partial x} = {\partial\over \partial x}({x \over x b_x + y b_y})$$
With an application of the quotient rule the result follows...
 
  • #10
Thanks. That was helpful:approve:
 

Similar threads

Replies
7
Views
2K
  • · Replies 4 ·
Replies
4
Views
2K
  • · Replies 3 ·
Replies
3
Views
2K
Replies
3
Views
2K
Replies
9
Views
2K
  • · Replies 35 ·
2
Replies
35
Views
4K
  • · Replies 13 ·
Replies
13
Views
3K
  • · Replies 2 ·
Replies
2
Views
2K
Replies
1
Views
1K
  • · Replies 14 ·
Replies
14
Views
2K