Partial derivative of potential energy and work

Click For Summary

Discussion Overview

The discussion revolves around the relationship between potential energy, work, and directional derivatives in the context of conservative forces. Participants explore the mathematical expressions related to these concepts, particularly focusing on the correct formulation of the directional derivative of potential energy and its implications for work done by conservative forces.

Discussion Character

  • Technical explanation
  • Debate/contested
  • Mathematical reasoning

Main Points Raised

  • One participant suggests that the infinitesimal work is equal to the negative of the directional derivative of potential energy in the direction of displacement.
  • Another participant counters that the initial formulation is incorrect, asserting that the correct relationship involves the gradient of potential energy and the differential work done.
  • A participant clarifies that the directional derivative of potential energy is represented by the dot product of the gradient and a unit vector in the direction of displacement.
  • Further clarification is provided regarding the change in potential energy and its relation to the displacement vector, emphasizing the distinction between differentials and derivatives.

Areas of Agreement / Disagreement

Participants express disagreement regarding the formulation of the relationship between potential energy, work, and directional derivatives. Multiple competing views remain on how to correctly express these concepts mathematically.

Contextual Notes

There are unresolved issues regarding the correct interpretation of directional derivatives and the notation used for potential energy and work. Participants highlight the importance of specifying directions and the distinction between different types of derivatives.

Soren4
Messages
127
Reaction score
2
For a conservative force \vec{F}=-\vec{\nabla} U \implies dW=-\vec{\nabla}U \cdot d\vec{s}

Where d\vec{s} is the infinitesimal vector displacement.

Does the following hold?

-\frac{\partial U}{\partial \vec{s}}=-\vec{\nabla} U \cdot d\vec{s}=d W, i.e. the infinitesimal work is minus the directional derivative of U in the direction of \vec{s}.
 
Physics news on Phys.org
No this doesn't make sense, you've written what the spatial derivative of the potential is, its ##\vec{F}## not dW.
 
Soren4 said:
For a conservative force \vec{F}=-\vec{\nabla} U \implies dW=-\vec{\nabla}U \cdot d\vec{s}

Where d\vec{s} is the infinitesimal vector displacement.

Does the following hold?

-\frac{\partial U}{\partial \vec{s}}=-\vec{\nabla} U \cdot d\vec{s}=d W, i.e. the infinitesimal work is minus the directional derivative of U in the direction of \vec{s}.
Your equation is wrong. It should read ##dU=\vec{\nabla} U \cdot \vec{ds}=-dW##
The interpretation is the infinitesimal work in the direction of ##\vec{ds}## is equal to minus the directional derivative of U in the direction of ##\vec{ds}##.
 
@jamie.j1989 Thanks for the answer, i just applied the rule that uses nabla for directional derivatives, so how to correctly write the directional derivative?@Chestermiller Thanks a lot for the reply, where is the exactly the mistake? Is it the fact of not having specified that the infinitesimal work is in the direction of ##\vec{ds}## ? Moreover how is the directional derivative of ##U## written explicitly, if ##\frac{\partial U}{\partial \vec{s}}## is wrong?
 
The directional derivative of ##U## is ##\vec{\nabla}U = \hat{i}\frac{\partial U}{\partial x}+\hat{j}\frac{\partial U}{\partial y}+\hat{k}\frac{\partial U}{\partial z}= -\left(\hat{i}F_x +\hat{j}F_y+\hat{k}F_z\right)##
 
No, ##\vec \nabla U## is the gradient of U (a vector). The directional derivative of U along a direction specified by a unit vector ##\hat n## is ##\vec \nabla U \cdot \hat n## (a scalar). If you go a distance ##ds## in the direction of ##\hat n##, then the change in U is ##dU = (\vec \nabla U \cdot \hat n) ds = \vec \nabla U \cdot (\hat n ds) = \vec \nabla U \cdot \vec{ds}##.
 
  • Like
Likes   Reactions: Soren4
Thanks a lot for the reply, where is the exactly the mistake? Is it the fact of not having specified that the infinitesimal work is in the direction of ##\vec{ds}## ?
No. It's that you set dU/ds equal to a differential, which, of course, it is not.

Moreover how is the directional derivative of ##U## written explicitly, if ##\frac{\partial U}{\partial \vec{s}}## is wrong?
If ##\vec{s}## is position vector from an arbitrary origin to a position in space, and ##\vec{s}+\vec{ds}## is a position vector from the origin to an adjacent position in space, then the change in potential U between ##\vec{s}## to ##\vec{s}+\vec{ds}## (in the direction of ##\vec{ds}## is given by:
$$dU=\vec{\nabla} U\cdot \vec{ds}$$The derivative of U with respect to distance in the direction of ##\vec{ds}## is obtained by dividing by the magnitude of the differential postion vector ##\vec{ds}##:
$$\frac{dU}{|\vec{ds}|}=\vec{\nabla} U\cdot \left(\frac{\vec{ds}}{|\vec{ds}|}\right)=\vec{\nabla} U\cdot \vec{n}_s$$
where ##\vec{n}_s## is a unit vector in the direction of ##\vec{ds}##.
 
  • Like
Likes   Reactions: Soren4

Similar threads

  • · Replies 13 ·
Replies
13
Views
1K
  • · Replies 11 ·
Replies
11
Views
2K
  • · Replies 1 ·
Replies
1
Views
2K
  • · Replies 12 ·
Replies
12
Views
3K
  • · Replies 32 ·
2
Replies
32
Views
4K
  • · Replies 2 ·
Replies
2
Views
2K
  • · Replies 2 ·
Replies
2
Views
1K
  • · Replies 3 ·
Replies
3
Views
1K
Replies
6
Views
2K
  • · Replies 4 ·
Replies
4
Views
2K