Is this vector calculus notation correct?

Click For Summary

Discussion Overview

The discussion revolves around the correctness of vector calculus notation, specifically regarding the representation of functions and their derivatives. Participants also explore the conversion of an equation from rectangular to cylindrical coordinates, touching on both theoretical and practical aspects of vector calculus.

Discussion Character

  • Technical explanation
  • Homework-related
  • Debate/contested

Main Points Raised

  • One participant presents a vector function and its derivative, questioning the correctness of the notation used.
  • Another participant suggests that while the first two notations appear correct, the notation for the derivative \(\frac{DF}{dx}\) is uncommon and proposes alternatives.
  • A different participant seeks assistance in converting a specific equation from rectangular to cylindrical coordinates, expressing confusion about the process.
  • A subsequent reply outlines a method for transforming the equation and discusses the nature of scalar versus vector fields, indicating uncertainty about the applicability of transformations to vector fields.

Areas of Agreement / Disagreement

Participants express differing views on the notation for derivatives in vector calculus, with no consensus reached on the preferred notation. Additionally, there is uncertainty regarding the transformation of equations between coordinate systems, particularly concerning scalar and vector fields.

Contextual Notes

Participants note the need for oversight or approval from more knowledgeable individuals regarding the correctness of their statements and methods, indicating a reliance on external validation for their claims.

Who May Find This Useful

Individuals studying vector calculus, particularly those grappling with notation and coordinate transformations, may find this discussion relevant.

hotvette
Homework Helper
Messages
1,001
Reaction score
11
My vector calculus is a bit rusty. Can anyone tell me if the following uses proper symbolism?

[tex] F &= \left[\begin{matrix}f_1(x_1,x_2) \\ f_2(x_1,x_2) \\ f_3(x_1,x_2) \end{matrix}\right] <br /> \qquad x = \left[\begin{matrix} x_1 \\ x_2 \end{matrix}\right] <br /> \qquad \frac{DF}{dx}&=<br /> \left[\begin{matrix}<br /> \rule{0pt}{3ex}\frac{\partial f_1}{\partial x_1} & \frac{\partial f_1}{\partial x_2} \\<br /> \rule{0pt}{3ex}\frac{\partial f_2}{\partial x_1} & \frac{\partial f_2}{\partial x_2} \\<br /> \rule{0pt}{3ex}\frac{\partial f_3}{\partial x_1} & \frac{\partial f_3}{\partial x_2}\end{matrix}\right][/tex]
 
Last edited:
Physics news on Phys.org
The first two look correct, but I don't think [tex]\frac{DF}{dx}[/tex] is a common notation. I would use just [tex]DF[/tex] or maybe [tex]\frac{\partial f}{\partial x}[/tex].

Edit: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Jacobian_matrix" uses the notation [tex]J_F[/tex].
 
Last edited by a moderator:
Im very turned around in vector calc! I have the equation 4y2 -4z2=5y/x-4x2 and I need to convert it from rectangular to cylindrical coordinates. Could someone explain this better than my professor?
 
Hi, Jon89bon!

I had a bit of vector calculus in my first semester at the university and I'm not sure if what I paste here is truly correct, so it would need an overview from a supervisor :)

Here's what we do:

1. we transform the equation: 4y^2 -4z^2=5y/x-4x^2 into

(4y^2 -4z^2+4x^2)x-5y=0=:f(x,y,z) and set a func. f equal to it.

2. As f is a SCALAR field, we could use the transformations:

(x,y,z)=(rcos(a),rsin(a),z), where r^2=x^2+y^2 and a is the angle of rotation around the z-axisremark: if you're good at algebra, you could skip the first step :)IMPORTANT: I think, this transformation does not apply to vector fields (when f is a vector), but I need an approval for that statement from s.o. else :)all the best, marin
 
Last edited:
Thanks I will work with this and see what I come up with!

Jon89bon
 

Similar threads

  • · Replies 3 ·
Replies
3
Views
4K
  • · Replies 12 ·
Replies
12
Views
3K
  • · Replies 4 ·
Replies
4
Views
3K
  • · Replies 1 ·
Replies
1
Views
3K
Replies
2
Views
2K
  • · Replies 4 ·
Replies
4
Views
2K
  • · Replies 6 ·
Replies
6
Views
2K
  • · Replies 3 ·
Replies
3
Views
2K
  • · Replies 3 ·
Replies
3
Views
3K
  • · Replies 2 ·
Replies
2
Views
2K