Jacobians of 2-space to 3-space Transformation

  • Context: Graduate 
  • Thread starter Thread starter yungman
  • Start date Start date
Click For Summary

Discussion Overview

The discussion centers on the concept of Jacobians in the context of transforming variables from 2-space to 3-space, particularly in relation to surface area calculations. Participants explore the definitions and applications of Jacobians when dealing with vector-valued functions and surface integrals.

Discussion Character

  • Technical explanation
  • Conceptual clarification
  • Debate/contested

Main Points Raised

  • One participant notes that textbooks typically discuss Jacobians for transformations between spaces of the same dimension (2D to 2D or 3D to 3D), but questions the treatment of a transformation from 2-space to 3-space.
  • Another participant confirms the Jacobian can be expressed as the cross product of partial derivatives, even when the transformation involves different dimensions.
  • A third participant references Wikipedia to support the idea that the Jacobian can be defined for transformations between spaces of differing dimensions, specifically stating that J = ∂(x,y,z)/∂(u,v).
  • There is a mention of surprise that the concept of a non-square Jacobian (3x2) is not commonly addressed in textbooks, despite its applicability in various cases.

Areas of Agreement / Disagreement

Participants express varying levels of understanding and agreement about the treatment of Jacobians in transformations between different dimensional spaces. Some participants affirm the validity of the approach, while others highlight a lack of coverage in traditional resources.

Contextual Notes

There is an indication that existing literature may not adequately address the use of Jacobians for transformations between spaces of different dimensions, leading to some confusion among participants.

Who May Find This Useful

This discussion may be of interest to students and professionals in mathematics, physics, and engineering who are exploring variable transformations and surface integrals in higher dimensions.

yungman
Messages
5,741
Reaction score
291
From more than one textbook, they only talking about change of variables from 2-space to 2-space or from 3-space to 3-spare. Eg:

[tex]\frac{\partial (x,y,z)}{\partial (u,v,w)} \hbox { for 3-space and }\frac{\partial (x,y)}{\partial (u,v)} \hbox{ for 2-space }[/tex]

But for surface area of 3-space in the following example where the vector value function:

[tex]\vec {r} = u\hat{x} + u cos(v) \hat{y} + u sin(v) \hat{z}[/tex]

You can see this is like:

[tex]\frac{\partial (x,y,z)}{\partial (u,v)}[/tex]

Which I don’t see this from the book. My question is whether the Jacobian is still:

[tex]| \frac{\pratial \vec{r}}{\partial u} X \frac{\pratial \vec{r}}{\partial v}|[/tex] ?

This is the standard way of finding surface area of a 3-space object. But this is like transform from 2 space [tex](u,v)[/itex] to 3-space[itex](x,y,z)[/itex].[/tex]
 
Physics news on Phys.org
Anyone?

I know the Jacobian is defined as:

[tex]|\frac{\partial \vec{r} }{\partial u} X \frac{\partial \vec{r} }{\partial v}|[/tex]

So it is the Jacobian even if [itex]\vec{r} = x(u,v)\hat{x} +y(u,v)\hat{y} + z(u,v)\hat{z}[/itex]

It works for finding surface intergrals. I just want to verify this here.
 
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Jacobian_matrix_and_determinant"

The domain and codomain can be of different (finite) dimensions. So in the case you're curious about, you will have
[tex]J = \frac{\partial(x,y,z)}{\partial(u,v)}[/tex]
 
Last edited by a moderator:
fluxions said:
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Jacobian_matrix_and_determinant"

The domain and codomain can be of different (finite) dimensions. So in the case you're curious about, you will have
[tex]J = \frac{\partial(x,y,z)}{\partial(u,v)}[/tex]

Thanks for the reply.

I am surprised Wikipedia has the answer! I gone through a lot of books and online stuff, they all only talked about square matrix where either it is 2X2 or 3X3!

That's what I suspect, because this 3X2 Jacobian work just as well in every single case.

Thanks

Alan
 
Last edited by a moderator:

Similar threads

  • · Replies 1 ·
Replies
1
Views
3K
  • · Replies 16 ·
Replies
16
Views
3K
  • · Replies 5 ·
Replies
5
Views
2K
  • · Replies 1 ·
Replies
1
Views
2K
  • · Replies 8 ·
Replies
8
Views
1K
  • · Replies 2 ·
Replies
2
Views
3K
  • · Replies 1 ·
Replies
1
Views
3K
  • · Replies 6 ·
Replies
6
Views
2K
  • · Replies 5 ·
Replies
5
Views
2K
  • · Replies 1 ·
Replies
1
Views
2K