Why Does the Laplacian of 1/Vector r Equal Zero?

[NewtonApple]

Homework Statement

Show that \nabla^{2}\left(\frac{1}{\overrightarrow{r}}\right)=0

Homework Equations

The Attempt at a Solution

Let \nabla=\hat{i}\frac{\partial}{\partial x}+\hat{j}\frac{\partial}{\partial y}+\hat{k}\frac{\partial}{\partial z}

and \overrightarrow{r}=x\hat{i}+y\hat{j}+z\hat{k}, \mid r\mid=\sqrt{x^{2}+y^{2}+z^{2}},

\hat{r}=\hat{i}+\hat{j}+\hat{k}

First calculate \nabla\left(\frac{1}{\overrightarrow{r}}\right)=\nabla\left(\frac{1}{\mid r\mid\hat{r}}\right)=\nabla\left(\frac{1}{\mid r\mid}\hat{r}\right)=\left[\hat{i}\frac{\partial}{\partial x}+\hat{j}\frac{\partial}{\partial y}+\hat{k}\frac{\partial}{\partial z}\right]\left[\frac{\hat{i}+\hat{j}+\hat{k}}{\sqrt{x^{2}+y^{2}+z^{2}}}\right]

= \hat{i}\frac{\partial}{\partial x}\left(x^{2}+y^{2}+z^{2}\right)^{\frac{-1}{2}}+\hat{j}\frac{\partial}{\partial y}\left(x^{2}+y^{2}+z^{2}\right)^{\frac{-1}{2}}+\hat{k}\frac{\partial}{\partial z}\left(x^{2}+y^{2}+z^{2}\right)^{\frac{-1}{2}}

Am I doing it the right way?

 

[TSny]

$\frac{1}{\vec{r}}$ doesn't make sense because it involves dividing by a vector.

Are you sure you aren't supposed to take the Laplacian of $\frac{1}{|\vec{r}|}$ instead?

 

[NewtonApple]

$\frac{1}{\vec{r}}$ doesn't make sense because it involves dividing by a vector.

Are you sure you aren't supposed to take the Laplacian of $\frac{1}{|\vec{r}|}$ instead?

It looks like a vector

The problem is from Mathematical Methods for Physicists by Tai L. Chow.

 

[TSny]

You're right, it does look like $1/\vec{r}$. I think it must be a misprint. It does turn out that $\nabla^2(1/r)=0$ (except at $r = 0$).

So, I'm thinking that's what was meant.

Part (c) also seems to have some misprints, unless the author is purposely trying to test whether you can tell if an expression is meaningless.