Partial derivative of coordinates

Click For Summary

Discussion Overview

The discussion revolves around the concept of partial derivatives in the context of mechanical systems with multiple degrees of freedom. Participants explore the implications of independence among generalized coordinates and the relationships between these coordinates as functions of time.

Discussion Character

  • Technical explanation
  • Conceptual clarification
  • Debate/contested
  • Mathematical reasoning

Main Points Raised

  • One participant questions the partial derivative of x with respect to y in a system with independent coordinates, suggesting it should not be zero.
  • Another participant asserts that if the coordinates are independent, the partial derivative is indeed zero.
  • A participant proposes that a relationship can be established between x(t) and y(t), leading to a computed partial derivative that is not zero, raising questions about the nature of total versus partial derivatives.
  • Clarifications are made regarding the definitions of partial derivatives, emphasizing that they hold all other independent variables fixed during differentiation.
  • Examples are provided to illustrate the confusion between total and partial derivatives, particularly in cases where multiple variables are parametrized with respect to a common independent variable.
  • Concerns are raised about mixing different types of derivatives and the implications of treating time as an independent variable while differentiating other variables.
  • One participant acknowledges the confusion and seeks further clarification on the application of the chain rule in the context of partial derivatives.

Areas of Agreement / Disagreement

Participants express differing views on the nature of partial derivatives, particularly in relation to total derivatives and the independence of variables. The discussion remains unresolved, with multiple competing perspectives on the definitions and applications of these derivatives.

Contextual Notes

Participants highlight the importance of correctly identifying independent and dependent variables when calculating derivatives, noting that assumptions about variable independence can significantly affect the results.

DoubleHelics
Messages
7
Reaction score
0
Hello, I have a simple question. Let's say we have a mechanical system with 2 degrees of freedom. Say the generalized coordinates (which are independent from each other in terms of constraints) are [tex]x[/tex] and [tex]y[/tex]. When we solve Lagrange-Euler equations for this system, we get time evolutions of coordinates as functions of time: [tex]x(t)[/tex] and [tex]y(t)[/tex]. I am wondering what the partial derivative of x with respect to y would be. this would not be 0, right?
 
Physics news on Phys.org
It is zero if they are independent coordinates.
 
But mathematically, I can find a relation between [tex]x(t)[/tex] and [tex]y(t)[/tex], then I could compute the partial derivative, right? Would that still be zero?
 
Yes. The total derivative dx/dy might not be zero, but the partial will.
[tex]\frac{\partial x}{\partial y}[/tex] means the change in x keeping x fixed.
 
Last edited by a moderator:
clem, thanks much for the explanations. But I am not sure what you mean by [tex]\frac{\partial x}{\partial y}[/tex] is "the change in x keeping x fixed.", do you mean the change in x keeping t fixed? Could you elaborate on that please?
 
The meaning of a partial derivative like [tex]\frac{\partial x}{\partial y}[/tex] is that all independent variables other than y are held fixed in the differentiation. Therefor x can't change in that derivative, so [tex]\frac{\partial x}{\partial y}[/tex] is zero by definition. The way I worded it was sort of funny non sequitor )obvious statement).
 
Ok, I think I understand what you mean. But, I thought [tex]t[/tex] is the independent variable in the mechanics problems. (Or am i wrong?)

Let me give an example:
Say we are analyzing the movement of a point mass, which is thrown from Earth's surface (assumed planar for the problem) with a velocity [tex]v[/tex], whose vertical component is [tex]v_y[/tex] (In +y direction) and horizontal component is [tex]v_x[/tex]. The gravitational acceleration, [tex]g[/tex], acts on the mass vertically to pull it in -y direction. [tex]x(t)[/tex] and [tex]y(t)[/tex] denote the horizontal and vertical components of position of the mass as a function of time. The solution for [tex]x(t)[/tex] is
[tex]x(t) = v_x \cdot t[/tex]
The solution for [tex]y(t)[/tex] is
[tex]y(t) = v_y \cdot t - \frac{1}{2} g t^2[/tex]
I am assuming that we only account for the time until the mass hits the ground, [tex]0 \leq t \leq 2\frac{v_y}{g}[/tex]. Having these, I will write [tex]y(t)[/tex] in terms of [tex]x(t)[/tex] as:
[tex]y(x) = \frac{v_y}{v_x}\cdot x - \frac{1}{2}g (\frac{x}{v_x})^2[/tex]
which I found simply by replacing [tex]t = \frac{x}{v_x}[/tex], which treats [tex]t[/tex] as a function of [tex]x[/tex], over the course of motion. Now I can compute the partial derivative of [tex]y[/tex] with respect to [tex]x[/tex] as:
[tex]\frac{\partial y}{\partial x} = \frac{v_y}{v_x} - g \frac{x}{v_x^2}[/tex]
which is not identically equal to [tex]0[/tex]. Did i do something wrong, or is this actually the total derivative of [tex]y[/tex] wrt [tex]x[/tex]?
 
What you have calculated is the total derivative.
`Partial' means something is held fixed. What have you held fixed?
 
Alright, I also thought that it should be the total derivative (as I was asking at the end of my last post). Ok then let me put it this way with another example, which I think should better illustrate my problem in understanding: Let's say I have three variables: x,y,z, which are parametrized with respect to t. Let's assume that [tex]t[/tex] is the ultimate independent variable, like time. [tex]x(t)[/tex], [tex]y(t)[/tex] and [tex]z(t)[/tex] given as:
[tex]x(t) = t[/tex]
[tex]y(t) = t^2[/tex]
[tex]z(t) = t^2 + 4 \cdot t[/tex]
now, I can write [tex]z[/tex] as:
[tex]z = y + 4 \cdot x[/tex]
then, partial derivative of [tex]z[/tex] with respect to [tex]x[/tex] and wrt [tex]y[/tex] would be:
[tex]\frac{\partial z}{\partial x} = 4[/tex]
[tex]\frac{\partial z}{\partial y} = 1[/tex]

Now, I can also write [tex]z[/tex] as:
[tex]z = x^2 + 4 \cdot x[/tex]
then partial derivatives change:
[tex]\frac{\partial z}{\partial x} = 2 \cdot x + 4[/tex]
[tex]\frac{\partial z}{\partial y} = 0[/tex]

Now, I can also write these using the chain rule:
[tex]\frac{\partial z}{\partial x} = \frac{\partial z}{\partial t} \cdot \frac{\partial t}{\partial x}[/tex]
and
[tex]\frac{\partial z}{\partial x} = \underbrace{(2\cdot t + 4)}_{\frac{\partial z}{\partial t}} \cdot 1[/tex]

and similarly for partial derivative of z wrt y
[tex]\frac{\partial z}{\partial y} = \frac{\partial z}{\partial t} \cdot \frac{\partial t}{\partial y}[/tex]
and
[tex]\frac{\partial z}{\partial y} = (2\cdot t + 4) \cdot \underbrace{\frac{1}{2\sqrt{y}}}_{\frac{\partial t}{\partial y}}[/tex]

The partial derivatives come out differently. Am I making a mistake here? Thanks a lot.
 
  • #10
DoubleHelics said:
Alright, I also thought that it should be the total derivative (as I was asking at the end of my last post). Ok then let me put it this way with another example, which I think should better illustrate my problem in understanding: Let's say I have three variables: x,y,z, which are parametrized with respect to t. Let's assume that [tex]t[/tex] is the ultimate independent variable, like time. [tex]x(t)[/tex], [tex]y(t)[/tex] and [tex]z(t)[/tex] given as:
[tex]x(t) = t[/tex]
[tex]y(t) = t^2[/tex]
[tex]z(t) = t^2 + 4 \cdot t[/tex]
now, I can write [tex]z[/tex] as:
[tex]z = y + 4 \cdot x[/tex]
then, partial derivative of [tex]z[/tex] with respect to [tex]x[/tex] and wrt [tex]y[/tex] would be:
[tex]\frac{\partial z}{\partial x} = 4[/tex]
[tex]\frac{\partial z}{\partial y} = 1[/tex]

Now, I can also write [tex]z[/tex] as:
[tex]z = x^2 + 4 \cdot x[/tex]
then partial derivatives change:
[tex]\frac{\partial z}{\partial x} = 2 \cdot x + 4[/tex]
[tex]\frac{\partial z}{\partial y} = 0[/tex]

Now, I can also write these using the chain rule:
[tex]\frac{\partial z}{\partial x} = \frac{\partial z}{\partial t} \cdot \frac{\partial t}{\partial x}[/tex]
and
[tex]\frac{\partial z}{\partial x} = \underbrace{(2\cdot t + 4)}_{\frac{\partial z}{\partial t}} \cdot 1[/tex]

and similarly for partial derivative of z wrt y
[tex]\frac{\partial z}{\partial y} = \frac{\partial z}{\partial t} \cdot \frac{\partial t}{\partial y}[/tex]
and
[tex]\frac{\partial z}{\partial y} = (2\cdot t + 4) \cdot \underbrace{\frac{1}{2\sqrt{y}}}_{\frac{\partial t}{\partial y}}[/tex]

The partial derivatives come out differently. Am I making a mistake here? Thanks a lot.

I think you made some mistakes in the quoted equations ... please check it over and correct them, or if what is there is really what you intended to write, then please indicate that. Then I can comment on what errors you might be making.
 
  • #11
The problem is that you're mixing up all kinds of derivatives. Partial, total and a type of derivative you invented yourself (the one in between partial and total).

You have the functions x y and z that depend on t therefore your t depends on x y and z.

The first derivative you take is some kind of mixed derivative. You arbitrarily take into account the x dependence of t, but not of t^2. It is like saying the derivative of of x^2+x is 1. If you want to take the x y z dependence of t into account you need to do it for all ts. That is what you did in your second dz/dx. However taking those dependencies into account means that you are not computing a partial derivative but a total derivative. Your third derivation (the chainrule one) is again not a partial derivative but a total derivative equal to your second attempt at calculating dz/dx. Why? Because again you take the x/t dependence into account.

As has been said before if you want to calculate the partial derivative you will have to keep all coordinates, except the coordinate you're differentiating with respect to, fixed.

partial derivative:
[tex] \frac{\partial z}{\partial x}=\frac{\partial }{\partial x} (t^2+4t)=0[/tex]

Total derivative:
[tex] \frac{d z}{d x}=\frac{\partial z}{\partial t} \frac{d t}{dx}[/tex]
 
  • #12
Ok, I think I understand that I am inventing a new type of derivative there, which does not make physical sense. (Thanks for bearing with me)

I have one more question. Let's assume we have three variables y, x, and t such that t is again independent variable. x and y are functions of t:
[tex]y = t^2 + t[/tex]
[tex]x = t[/tex]
Thus, partial derivative of y wrt x is 0. (right?) But, assuming that t is also a function of x, if I write the chain rule (which I got from Stewart's calculus book):
[tex]\frac{\partial y}{\partial x} = \frac{\partial y}{\partial t} \cdot \frac{\partial t}{\partial x} = 2t + 1[/tex].
This looks like the total derivative of y wrt x to me. Am I using the definition wrongly?
 

Similar threads

Replies
6
Views
2K
  • · Replies 18 ·
Replies
18
Views
2K
  • · Replies 2 ·
Replies
2
Views
1K
  • · Replies 11 ·
Replies
11
Views
2K
Replies
5
Views
2K
  • · Replies 5 ·
Replies
5
Views
1K
  • · Replies 9 ·
Replies
9
Views
2K
  • · Replies 3 ·
Replies
3
Views
2K
  • · Replies 17 ·
Replies
17
Views
3K
  • · Replies 22 ·
Replies
22
Views
2K