Partial derivative: taking out the 'f'

Click For Summary

Homework Help Overview

The discussion revolves around the mathematical correctness of using the partial derivative operator ∂/∂x without an explicit function, as well as the implications of substituting one function for another in the context of partial differentiation. The subject area includes partial derivatives and their application in different coordinate systems.

Discussion Character

  • Conceptual clarification, Assumption checking

Approaches and Questions Raised

  • Participants explore the meaning of the partial derivative operator and question the validity of substituting functions within differentiation. There is a discussion about whether the operator can be considered meaningful without a function and the implications of changing from one function to another.

Discussion Status

Some participants have provided clarifications regarding the nature of the partial derivative operator and its application. There is an ongoing exploration of the notational conventions used in the problem, with no explicit consensus reached on the implications of substituting functions.

Contextual Notes

Participants note that the original problem involves changing second derivatives into terms of different variables, which may require careful consideration of the functions involved. There is also mention of the original poster's background and upcoming transition to college studies in physics.

unscientific
Messages
1,728
Reaction score
13

Homework Statement



In the first paragraph, I know its missing a function which they did not put, g. Without puting ∂g/∂x but simply putting ∂/∂x, is that equation even mathematically correct? I know they are "filling in the g later" but does this corrupt the in-between steps in anyway?

In the second paragraph, from step 1 to step 2:

-how can they simply " take out the f "?

-how can they simply replace 'f' by 'g'? would this imply that f = g? (which is obviously not the case)

The Attempt at a Solution



I have come to several conclusions to make sense of what's happening:

1. The term ' ∂/∂x ' by itself is meaningless, only when you slap it together with a function like in (∂/∂x)(∂g/∂x) would it mean that you are partially differentiating 'g' twice with respect to 'x'.I only started the topic of partial differentiation today, and the methods presented here seems weird to me...
 

Attachments

  • taking out the f.jpg
    taking out the f.jpg
    37 KB · Views: 505
Physics news on Phys.org
∂/∂x is not meaningless. It is the symbol for the partial differentiation *operator*. An operator is a thing that *acts* on a function (i.e. performs some mathematical operation on that function). In this case, the operator performs the operation of taking the partial derivative with respect to x. Therefore, ∂f/∂x and (∂/∂x)f both mean the same thing: that the partial differentiation operator is acting on the function f to produce the partial derivative of f with respect to x.

I don't know why f is suddenly changed to g. Ask your prof.
 
To elaborate: the first line of your text, which expresses what the ∂/∂x operator becomes in spherical coordinates, will be true *regardless* of what function you plug in. Differentiating wrt x always corresponds to differentiating wrt rho and multiplying by cos(phi) and then subtracting blah blah blah etc etc. This is the power of generalizing to differentiation operators in the first place.
 
cepheid said:
To elaborate: the first line of your text, which expresses what the ∂/∂x operator becomes in spherical coordinates, will be true *regardless* of what function you plug in. Differentiating wrt x always corresponds to differentiating wrt rho and multiplying by cos(phi) and then subtracting blah blah blah etc etc. This is the power of generalizing to differentiation operators in the first place.

Thanks! I think i better understand the meaning of operators now, the phrase " it is used to act on another function" really explains it. The original question was to change change d2f/dy2 and d2f/dx2 into terms of p, ∅. I suppose by subsituting x(p,∅) and y(p,∅) into f it can be rebranded into a new function g..

Haha I'm not in college at the moment, i finished high school 3 years ago and will enter college in october for a physics degree :)
 
unscientific said:
The original question was to change change d2f/dy2 and d2f/dx2 into terms of p, ∅. I suppose by subsituting x(p,∅) and y(p,∅) into f it can be rebranded into a new function g.

I think that reasoning is most likely correct. The author is being notationally exact and writing [itex]f(x,y) = f(x(p,\phi),y(p,\phi)) \equiv g(p,\phi)[/itex], rather than doing what most people do and just changing notation so that [itex]f(x,y) \rightarrow f(p,\phi)[/itex].
 

Similar threads

  • · Replies 10 ·
Replies
10
Views
2K
  • · Replies 2 ·
Replies
2
Views
2K
  • · Replies 6 ·
Replies
6
Views
2K
  • · Replies 7 ·
Replies
7
Views
2K
  • · Replies 8 ·
Replies
8
Views
2K
Replies
6
Views
1K
  • · Replies 2 ·
Replies
2
Views
2K
  • · Replies 2 ·
Replies
2
Views
2K
  • · Replies 2 ·
Replies
2
Views
1K
Replies
10
Views
3K