Undergrad Intuition on divergence and curl

Click For Summary
SUMMARY

The discussion centers on the concepts of divergence and curl in vector fields, specifically addressing misconceptions about their behavior in various scenarios. It clarifies that curl can be non-zero even in fields that appear straight, as demonstrated by the vector field \(\vec F = \frac{\hat y}{x}\), which has a curl of \(-\frac{1}{x^2}\). Additionally, it emphasizes that divergence is not always zero in fields that seem to point in one direction, as shown in the leftmost figures where there are field sources. The conversation also references the book "Div, Grad, Curl and all that" for further reading.

PREREQUISITES
  • Understanding of vector calculus concepts such as divergence and curl
  • Familiarity with polar and Cartesian coordinate systems
  • Basic knowledge of vector fields and their graphical representations
  • Experience with mathematical notation and operations in calculus
NEXT STEPS
  • Study the mathematical definitions and properties of curl and divergence in vector fields
  • Learn how to compute curl and divergence in both polar and Cartesian coordinates
  • Explore the implications of field line density in vector field representations
  • Read "Div, Grad, Curl and all that" to deepen understanding of vector calculus
USEFUL FOR

Students and professionals in mathematics, physics, and engineering who are looking to enhance their understanding of vector calculus, particularly in the context of fluid dynamics and electromagnetism.

cgiustini
Messages
11
Reaction score
0
Hi,

I'm looking at the following graph, but there are a few things I don't get. For instance:
  • curl should always be zero in circles where the field lines are totally straight (right-most figure)
  • curl should always be non-zero in circles where the field lines are rotating (center figure in 2nd from right figure)
  • divergence should always be zero in circles where field lines around pointed in one general direction - ie there is no field "source" (two left-most figures)
The writing in the picture below seems to contradict them - is my understanding incorrect?

Thanks,
Carlo
  • curl_div.PNG
 
Mathematics news on Phys.org
In the first diagram the vector field everywhere except at the origin appears to be ##(1,0)## in polar coordinates, which is ##\left(\frac x{\sqrt{x^2+y^2}},\frac y{\sqrt{x^2+y^2}}\right)## in rectangular coords. What do you get when you calculate the divergence of those at an arbitrary point away from the origin? (I get a nonzero result, whether I do the calc in polar or rectangular coords, but I may have miscalculated)

Intuitively that makes sense because the field lines become farther apart as you move away from the origin, and that 'divergence' process continues no matter how far away you go (although it slows, so as to asymptotically approach zero from above).
 
Last edited:
cgiustini said:
The writing in the picture below seems to contradict them - is my understanding incorrect?
You are correct: Your understanding is incorrect. I'll look at your three items point by point.

Curl should always be zero in circles where the field lines are totally straight (right-most figure)
The figures in the opening post use a fairly common technique where the density of lines represents the strength of the vector field. Note that the density of lines is not constant in the right-most figure. A better way to think of curl is "if one places a test object that is free to rotate about an axis at some point the field (e.g., a waterwheel), would the field make it rotate?" In this case, the increasing field strength to the right would make the test object rotate.

Mathematically, the 2D curl in cartesian coordinates of \vec F = M(x,y)\hat x + N(x,y)\hat y is \nabla\times \vec F = \frac{\partial N}{\partial x}-\frac{\partial M}{\partial y}. The rightmost figure displays something like \vec F = \frac{\hat y}x, where the x-axis points leftward and the origin is somewhere off the right edge of the figure. This has curl -\frac 1 {x^2}, which is non-zero.

Curl should always be non-zero in circles where the field lines are rotating (center figure in 2nd from right figure)
The key difference between the center figure and the second from the right figure is the density of lines. In the center of figure, the density of lines decreases by 1/r, while the density is constant in the the second from the right figure. The center figure portrays a rotating flow that is irrotational. The second from the right figure portrays a rotating flow that is not irrotational, and the rightmost figure portrays a flow that is not rotating but is nonetheless not irrotational.

Divergence should always be zero in circles where field lines around pointed in one general direction - ie there is no field "source" (two left-most figures)
There obviously is a field source in the two leftmost figures. The second to left figure depicts a central radial force field, while the leftmost figure depicts a central radial force field plus a radial force field emanating from the boundary of a circle centered around the central field. What those little circles are trying to depict is whether there is net flux into or out of a closed region. In the leftmost figure, the dashed circle crosses the boundary of the outer source, so the divergence there is nonzero. There are two circles in the second to left figure, one at the center where the net flow is obviously out of the circle (so a nonzero divergence) and another well removed from the center where the net flow is zero (so a zero divergence).
 

Similar threads

Replies
1
Views
2K
  • · Replies 5 ·
Replies
5
Views
1K
Replies
1
Views
2K
  • · Replies 11 ·
Replies
11
Views
4K
  • · Replies 12 ·
Replies
12
Views
2K
  • · Replies 7 ·
Replies
7
Views
2K
Replies
6
Views
7K
  • · Replies 8 ·
Replies
8
Views
4K
Replies
2
Views
4K
  • · Replies 4 ·
Replies
4
Views
10K