Is it valid to split the derivative in deriving the equation for e_s(T)?

Click For Summary
SUMMARY

The discussion centers on the validity of splitting derivatives in the context of deriving the equation for saturation vapor pressure, \( e_s(T) \). The equation is derived from the differential equation \( \frac{de_{s}}{dT} = \frac{L_{v}e_{s}}{R_{v}T^{2}} \) using the technique known as Separation of Variables. This method is widely accepted in physics and engineering, despite some reservations from pure mathematicians regarding its rigor. The final derived equation is \( e_{s}(T) = 6.11 e^{\frac{L}{R_{v}}(\frac{1}{T}-\frac{1}{273})} \).

PREREQUISITES
  • Understanding of calculus, specifically differentiation and integration.
  • Familiarity with the concept of Separation of Variables in differential equations.
  • Knowledge of thermodynamic properties, particularly latent heat \( L_{v} \) and gas constant \( R_{v} \).
  • Basic understanding of the exponential function and its applications in physical equations.
NEXT STEPS
  • Study the application of Separation of Variables in solving differential equations.
  • Learn about the derivation and implications of the Clausius-Clapeyron equation in thermodynamics.
  • Explore the properties of the exponential function in relation to physical phenomena.
  • Investigate the differences in mathematical rigor between physics and pure mathematics, particularly in the context of derivatives.
USEFUL FOR

This discussion is beneficial for students and professionals in physics, engineering, and applied mathematics, particularly those involved in thermodynamics and differential equations.

KingBigness
Messages
94
Reaction score
0

Homework Statement



From
\frac{de_{s}}{dT} = \frac{L_{v}e_{s}}{R_{v}T^{2}}

derive

e_{s}(T) = 6.11 e^{\frac{L}{RV}(\frac{1}{T}-\frac{1}{273})}

Homework Equations


The Attempt at a Solution



The way my lecturer derived it was he 'split' the derivative and took them to their respective sides and integrated.

So he got

\frac{de_{s}}{e_{s}} = \frac{LdT}{R_{v}T^{2}}

However I was under the impression that you can't 'split' a derivative like that. Is this just a shortcut some physicists take to make the maths more simple? If it is what is the correct way of deriving this?
 
Physics news on Phys.org
Curious3141 said:
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Separation_of_variables

It's not just "physicist's shorthand", it's a well-worn technique called Separation of Variables. Some might balk at the notation, but it's generally accepted and makes life easier.

How accepted is it? I am doing a double degree in pure mathematics and physics. If I was to do this in my pure maths classes would I be stoned?
 
KingBigness said:
How accepted is it? I am doing a double degree in pure mathematics and physics. If I was to do this in my pure maths classes would I be stoned?

I've taken calculus 1 and I've seen it before? :s
 
iRaid said:
I've taken calculus 1 and I've seen it before? :s

Sorry I wasn't very clear. I have seen it before and done it countless times I just always have a memory of a teacher saying don't tell a pure mathematician about it.
 
KingBigness said:

Homework Statement



From
\displaystyle \frac{de_{s}}{dT} = \frac{L_{v}e_{s}}{R_{v}T^{2}}

derive

\displaystyle e_{s}(T) = 6.11 e^{\frac{L}{RV}(\frac{1}{T}-\frac{1}{273})}

Homework Equations



The Attempt at a Solution



The way my lecturer derived it was he 'split' the derivative and took them to their respective sides and integrated.

So he got

\displaystyle \frac{de_{s}}{e_{s}} = \frac{LdT}{R_{v}T^{2}}

However, I was under the impression that you can't 'split' a derivative like that. Is this just a shortcut some physicists take to make the maths more simple? If it is what is the correct way of deriving this?
In my experience, physicists & engineers are notorious for treating Leibniz's notation for the derivative as if it were a fraction.

A more rigorous handling of this derivative equation might be as follows:
Treating es as a function of T we have

\displaystyle \frac{d}{dT}(e_{s}) = \frac{L_{v}e_{s}}{R_{v}T^{2}}

Rewriting this equation gives us

\displaystyle \frac{1}{e_{s}}\frac{d}{dT}(e_{s}) = \frac{L}{R_{v}T^{2}}

Integrating w.r.t. T gives

\displaystyle \int {\frac{1}{e_{s}}\frac{d}{dT}(e_{s})}dT = \int{\frac{L}{R_{v}T^{2}}}dT

We can rewrite the integral on the left hand side.

\displaystyle \int {\frac{1}{e_{s}}\frac{d}{dT}(e_{s})}dT = \int {\frac{1}{e_{s}}}\,de_{s}​

Alternatively, if \displaystyle \frac{d}{dT}(e_{s}) = \frac{L_{v}e_{s}}{R_{v}T^{2}}\,,
then the differential of es is given by \displaystyle d\,e_{s} = \frac{L_{v}e_{s}}{R_{v}T^{2}}\,dT
 
SammyS said:
In my experience, physicists & engineers are notorious for treating Leibniz's notation for the derivative as if it were a fraction.

A more rigorous handling of this derivative equation might be as follows:
Treating es as a function of T we have

\displaystyle \frac{d}{dT}(e_{s}) = \frac{L_{v}e_{s}}{R_{v}T^{2}}

Rewriting this equation gives us

\displaystyle \frac{1}{e_{s}}\frac{d}{dT}(e_{s}) = \frac{L}{R_{v}T^{2}}

Integrating w.r.t. T gives

\displaystyle \int {\frac{1}{e_{s}}\frac{d}{dT}(e_{s})}dT = \int{\frac{L}{R_{v}T^{2}}}dT

We can rewrite the integral on the left hand side.

\displaystyle \int {\frac{1}{e_{s}}\frac{d}{dT}(e_{s})}dT = \int {\frac{1}{e_{s}}}\,de_{s}​

Alternatively, if \displaystyle \frac{d}{dT}(e_{s}) = \frac{L_{v}e_{s}}{R_{v}T^{2}}\,,
then the differential of es is given by \displaystyle d\,e_{s} = \frac{L_{v}e_{s}}{R_{v}T^{2}}\,dT

exactly what I wanted. thank you
 

Similar threads

Replies
2
Views
2K
Replies
6
Views
2K
  • · Replies 30 ·
2
Replies
30
Views
2K
  • · Replies 6 ·
Replies
6
Views
2K
  • · Replies 7 ·
Replies
7
Views
2K
Replies
7
Views
2K
  • · Replies 2 ·
Replies
2
Views
2K
  • · Replies 3 ·
Replies
3
Views
2K
Replies
5
Views
4K
  • · Replies 1 ·
Replies
1
Views
2K