How to Prove Vector Calculus Identity Involving Cross Product and Gradient?

Click For Summary
SUMMARY

The discussion focuses on proving the vector calculus identity involving the cross product and gradient: (\vec{r}\times\nabla)\cdot(\vec{r}\times\nabla)=r^2\nabla^2-r^2 \frac{\partial^2}{\partial r^2}-2r\frac{\partial}{\partial r}. Key equations referenced include the Levi-Civita symbol and the Kronecker delta, specifically (\hat{e_i}\times\hat{e_j})=\epsilon_{ijk} and (\hat{e_i}\cdot\hat{e_j})=\delta_{ij}. The participants express confusion regarding the application of the gradient operator and the arrangement of terms in the proof.

PREREQUISITES
  • Understanding of vector calculus identities
  • Familiarity with the gradient operator and its properties
  • Knowledge of the Levi-Civita symbol and Kronecker delta
  • Proficiency in manipulating tensor notation
NEXT STEPS
  • Study the properties of the Levi-Civita symbol in vector calculus
  • Learn about the application of the gradient operator in vector fields
  • Explore advanced topics in tensor calculus
  • Practice proving vector calculus identities with examples
USEFUL FOR

Students and professionals in mathematics, physics, and engineering who are working with vector calculus and need to understand complex identities involving gradients and cross products.

lylos
Messages
77
Reaction score
0

Homework Statement


Prove the following:
(\vec{r}\times\nabla)\cdot(\vec{r}\times\nabla)=r^2\nabla^2-r^2 \frac{\partial^2}{\partial r^2}-2r\frac{\partial}{\partial r}

Homework Equations


(\hat{e_i}\times\hat{e_j})=\epsilon_{ijk}
(\hat{e_i}\cdot\hat{e_j})=\delta_{ij}


The Attempt at a Solution


(r_i\nabla_j\epsilon_{ijk}r_l\nabla_m\epsilon_{lmn})(\hat{e_k}\cdot\hat{e_n})
(r_i\nabla_j\epsilon_{ijk}r_l\nabla_m\epsilon_{lmn}\delta_{kn})
(r_i\nabla_j\epsilon_{ijk}r_l\nabla_m\epsilon_{lmk})
(r_i\nabla_jr_l\nabla_m)(\delta_{il}\delta_{jm}-\delta_{im}\delta_{jl})
(r_i\nabla_jr_i\nabla_j)-(r_i\nabla_ir_j\nabla_j)

At this point, I'm lost. Does the gradient operator work on all terms, should I rearrange?
 
Physics news on Phys.org
One of your equations is wrong,
<br /> (\hat{e_i}\times\hat{e_j})=\epsilon_{ijk}\hat{e}_{k}<br />
I personally would write:
<br /> \mathbf{r}=x_{i}\hat{e}_{i},\quad\nabla =\hat{e}_{i}\partial_{i}<br />
Hopefully this should help.

Mat
 

Similar threads

  • · Replies 5 ·
Replies
5
Views
2K
  • · Replies 9 ·
Replies
9
Views
2K
  • · Replies 2 ·
Replies
2
Views
4K
  • · Replies 9 ·
Replies
9
Views
2K
  • · Replies 10 ·
Replies
10
Views
7K
  • · Replies 3 ·
Replies
3
Views
3K
  • · Replies 4 ·
Replies
4
Views
3K
  • · Replies 4 ·
Replies
4
Views
2K
  • · Replies 2 ·
Replies
2
Views
3K
  • · Replies 4 ·
Replies
4
Views
3K