Levi Civita symbol on Curl of Vector cross product

Nikitin
Messages
734
Reaction score
27

Homework Statement


Use the LC symbol to calculate the following: $$\nabla \times \frac{\vec{m} \times \hat{r}}{r^2}$$

Where ##\vec{m}## is just a vector, and ##\hat{r}## is the unit radial vector and ##r## is the length of the radial vector.

Homework Equations


On the Levi Civita symbol: http://folk.uio.no/patricg/teaching/a112/levi-civita/

The Attempt at a Solution



I've gotten to ##\epsilon_{kij} \epsilon_{klm} m_l \frac{r^2 \partial_j r_m - r_m \partial_j r^2}{r^4}##, but I don't know how to take the derivatives..
 
Physics news on Phys.org
Nikitin said:
I've gotten to ##\epsilon_{kij} \epsilon_{klm} m_l \frac{r^2 \partial_j r_m - r_m \partial_j r^2}{r^4}##, but I don't know how to take the derivatives..
That result doesn't look right to me. How did you get it? Note that if ##\hat r=\frac{\vec r}{r}##, then
$$\frac{\hat r}{r^2}=\frac{\vec r}{r^3}=\bigg(\frac{r_i}{(r_jr_j)^{\frac 3 2}}\bigg) \hat e_i.$$
 
On the link you provided, there is a proof for ## A\times B \times C=B(A \cdot C) - C(A \cdot B) ## using the LC method.
If ##\vec{m}## is just a vector, does that mean constant, i.e. derivatives equal zero?
That should leave you with something like ## \vec{m} ( \nabla \cdot \frac{\hat{r}}{r^2}) ##
You could also look at ## \frac{\hat{r}}{r^2}=\frac{1}{x^2+y^2+z^2}\hat{r}## so taking the partial derivatives should not be too much of a challenge.
 
Ruber, yes but here you have a curl along with a function (##r^2##) involved.

But shouldn't it be much easier to perform the derivation in spherical coordinates? This is what's creating the struggle.

Fredrik said:
That result doesn't look right to me. How did you get it? Note that if ##\hat r=\frac{\vec r}{r}##, then
$$\frac{\hat r}{r^2}=\frac{\vec r}{r^3}=\bigg(\frac{r_i}{(r_jr_j)^{\frac 3 2}}\bigg) \hat e_i.$$
I just wrote up the definition, ordered the resulting equation and used the product rule to get started with the derivations. Note, my ##r_m##'s are actually the ##m##th coordinate of ##\hat{r}##, of not ##\vec{r}##.

So basically I started with this: $$\epsilon_{ijk} \partial_j \epsilon_{klm} m_l \frac{r_m}{r^2}$$, and used the product rule after ordering to arrive to the equation in the OP.
 
Nikitin said:
Note, my ##r_m##'s are actually the ##m##th coordinate of ##\hat{r}##, of not ##\vec{r}##.
But the derivatives are with respect to the mth coordinate of ##\vec r##, so with your definition of ##r_m##, you don't have ##\partial_i x_j=\delta_{ij}##. Instead you have to do something like this (where ##x_m## is the mth component of ##\vec r=r\hat r##):
$$\partial_i r_j =\frac{\partial}{\partial x_i} r_j =\frac{\partial}{\partial x_i}\frac{x_j}{\sqrt{x_kx_k}}.$$
 
But since ##\hat{r}## is just a one-component vector, shouldn't it be extremely straightforward to use spherical-coordinates ##\partial_i## on it? Why do you change to xyz coordinates?
 
It doesn't seem so straightforward to me. In spherical coordinates, ##\vec{r}## depends on all three coordinates in a relatively complicated way whereas in cartesian coordinates you have simply ##\partial_i x_j = \delta_{ij}##.
 
  • Like
Likes Nikitin
I never changed coordinates. I just used the definitions. The cross product is defined by ##x\times y=(x\times y)_i e_i=(\varepsilon_{ijk}x_jy_k) e_i##, where the ##e_i## are the standard basis vectors, not the basis vectors associated with the spherical coordinate system. ##\nabla\times f(x)## is defined similarly, as ##\big(\varepsilon_{ijk}\frac{\partial}{\partial x_j}f_k(x)\big) e_i##.

In this problem, we have
$$f(x)=m\times\frac{\hat r}{r^2}=m\times\frac{\vec r}{r^3},$$ and therefore
$$f_k(x)=\varepsilon_{kln}m_l\frac{x_n}{r^3}=\varepsilon_{kln}m_l\frac{x_n}{(x_px_p)^{\frac 3 2}}.$$ I don't know if there's a way to use both spherical coordinates and the Levi-Civita symbol. (Note that the problem requires you to use the latter). If you know such a way, you can certainly try it.
 
  • Like
Likes Nikitin
OK fine I'll just do it as you said. Thanks.
 

Similar threads

  • · Replies 5 ·
Replies
5
Views
2K
  • · Replies 3 ·
Replies
3
Views
2K
  • · Replies 9 ·
Replies
9
Views
2K
  • · Replies 20 ·
Replies
20
Views
4K
  • · Replies 11 ·
Replies
11
Views
3K
  • · Replies 7 ·
Replies
7
Views
2K
  • · Replies 10 ·
Replies
10
Views
6K
  • · Replies 8 ·
Replies
8
Views
2K
Replies
33
Views
4K
  • · Replies 4 ·
Replies
4
Views
4K