Notation for 2nd-order mixed derivatives

Click For Summary

Homework Help Overview

The discussion revolves around the notation for second-order mixed derivatives in calculus, specifically the differences in representation between various sources, including textbooks and online references. Participants are exploring the conventions used in mathematics versus those in physics or applied sciences.

Discussion Character

  • Conceptual clarification, Assumption checking

Approaches and Questions Raised

  • Participants are questioning the standardization of notation for mixed partial derivatives, particularly the equivalence of f_xy and f_yx. Some express confusion over different interpretations of the notation and its implications in various contexts.

Discussion Status

The conversation is ongoing, with participants sharing their perspectives on the notation and its usage in different fields. Some have provided references to external sources, while others have noted the lack of a clear consensus on what constitutes the "correct" notation.

Contextual Notes

There are mentions of specific contexts, such as calculus textbooks and partial differential equations, which may influence the notation used. Participants also highlight that different fields may adopt varying conventions, leading to potential misunderstandings.

kingwinner
Messages
1,266
Reaction score
0

Homework Statement


According to Wikipedia and one of my calculus textbooks: (I am used to this notation)
378b7ac113c92212162a0f23c27c1175.png

But I've seen another source writing fxy=∂2f/∂x∂y=∂xyf which is totally inconsistent with the above. How come?

Which one is standard? Is the second one wrong, or is it acceptable? The second one is driving me crazy...is it ever used anywhere?


Homework Equations


N/A


The Attempt at a Solution


N/A

Thank you!
 
Physics news on Phys.org
If you replace f_xy in your first example with f_yx, then I'm with you. For basically all examples of interest in physics or the sciences, f_xy=f_yx. Hence, the free interchange of x and y. In mathematics there are examples of functions where f_xy is not equal to f_yx.
 
Dick said:
If you replace f_xy in your first example with f_yx, then I'm with you. For basically all examples of interest in physics or the sciences, f_xy=f_yx. Hence, the free interchange of x and y. In mathematics there are examples of functions where f_xy is not equal to f_yx.

fxy means (fx)y, no?
So I would interpret fxy as taking partial derivative w.r.t. x first and then w.r.t. y which is consistent with my calculus textbook.

However, in my studies of partial differential equations (which I would classify as math rather than science), they write fxy=∂2f/∂x∂y=∂xyf which is inconsistent with the above.
2f/∂x∂y means taking partial derivative w.r.t. y first and then w.r.t. x, but fxy to me is the opposite.

Which notation is standard in mathematics?

Thanks!
 
Last edited:
You know, I've never thought about it that hard. Wikipedia says ∂2f/∂x∂y is f_yx. I guess I'll trust them. The operator notation is clearer.
 
kingwinner said:
Which one is standard? Is the second one wrong, or is it acceptable? The second one is driving me crazy...is it ever used anywhere?
http://mathworld.wolfram.com/MixedPartialDerivative.html, for one.

What is the "correct" way to denote a similarity transformation:
[tex]QAQ^{-1}[/tex] or [tex]Q^{-1}AQ[/tex]

What is the "correct" way to represent a rotation by angle [itex]\theta[/itex] about an axis [itex]\hat u[/itex] as a quaternion:
[tex]\bmatrix \cos \theta/2 \\ \hat u \sin \theta/2\endbmatrix[/tex] or [tex]\bmatrix \cos \theta/2 \\ -\hat u \sin \theta/2\endbmatrix[/tex] or [tex]\bmatrix\hat u \sin \theta/2 \\ \cos \theta/2 \endbmatrix[/tex] or [tex]\bmatrix -\hat u \sin \theta/2 \\ \cos \theta/2 \endbmatrix[/tex]

What is the "correct" way to represent [itex]\partial/\partial y\left(\partial f/\partial x\right)[/itex]:
[tex]f_{xy}[/itex] or [tex]f_{yx}[/tex]The correct answer is: Asking which way is the "correct" way is wrong. There are lots of cases where different nomenclatures are used in different places. I just gave three examples; there are many more. You need to recognize that sometimes there are multiple ways to write things. Sometimes the chosen nomenclature is obvious from context. Sometimes it isn't so obvious; hopefully the author of a paper describes the nomenclature. Sometimes not. Such is life.[/tex]
 
Last edited:

Similar threads

  • · Replies 6 ·
Replies
6
Views
2K
  • · Replies 6 ·
Replies
6
Views
9K
  • · Replies 2 ·
Replies
2
Views
4K
  • · Replies 8 ·
Replies
8
Views
5K
  • · Replies 2 ·
Replies
2
Views
2K
  • · Replies 12 ·
Replies
12
Views
2K
  • · Replies 2 ·
Replies
2
Views
2K
  • · Replies 7 ·
Replies
7
Views
2K
  • · Replies 5 ·
Replies
5
Views
2K
Replies
1
Views
3K