1. Not finding help here? Sign up for a free 30min tutor trial with Chegg Tutors
    Dismiss Notice
Dismiss Notice
Join Physics Forums Today!
The friendliest, high quality science and math community on the planet! Everyone who loves science is here!

Partial differentiation

  1. Feb 25, 2006 #1
    Say, E is dependent to x,y,z. I'm expecting it's derivative at [tex]x_0,y_0,z_0[/tex] to be

    [tex]dE = \lim_{\substack{\Delta x\rightarrow 0\\\Delta y\rightarrow 0\\\Delta z\rightarrow 0}} E(x_0+\Delta x, y_0+\Delta y,z_0+\Delta z) - E(x_0,y_0,z_0)[/tex]

    But with following definition, it's not the thing above:

    [tex]dE = \lim_{\substack{\Delta x\rightarrow 0\\\Delta y\rightarrow 0\\\Delta z\rightarrow 0}} \frac{E(x_0+\Delta x, y_0,z_0) - E(x_0,y_0,z_0)}{\Delta x} \Delta x + \frac{E(x_0, y_0+\Delta y,z_0) - E(x_0,y_0,z_0)}{\Delta y} \Delta y + \frac{E(x_0, y_0,z_0+\Delta z) - E(x_0,y_0,z_0)}{\Delta z} \Delta z = \frac{\partial E}{\partial x}dx + \frac{\partial E}{\partial y}dy + \frac{\partial E}{\partial z}dz[/tex].

    Now, which is correct? (and why?!?)
     
    Last edited: Feb 25, 2006
  2. jcsd
  3. Feb 25, 2006 #2

    HallsofIvy

    User Avatar
    Staff Emeritus
    Science Advisor

    Neither one. The differential (not "derivative") is
    [tex]dE= \left(\lim_{\Delta x\rightarrow0}\frac{E(x_0+\Delta x,y_0,z_0)-E(x_0,y_0,z_0)}{\Delta x}\right)dx+ \left(\lim_{\Delta y\rightarrow 0}\frac{E(x_0,y_0+\Delta y,z_0)-E(x_0,y_0,z_0)}{\Delta y}\right)dy+ \left(\lim_{\Delta z\rightarrow 0}\frac{E(x_0,y_0,z_0+\Delta z)-E(x_0,y_0,z_0)}{\Delta z}\right)dz[/tex]
    That's the same as your second formula except for the "d" rather than "[itex]\Delta[/itex]" in the numerator.

    Why would you "expect" the first? In one variable, would you "expect" the differential of f(x) to be
    [tex]df= lim_{\substack{\Delta x\rightarrow 0}}f(x_0+\Delta x)- f(x_0)[/tex]
    If f is any continuous function, that's 0!
     
    Last edited: Feb 25, 2006
  4. Feb 25, 2006 #3
    Whoops, just a typo anyway.

    That was just a guesswork based on intuition and my ignorance, I simply don't know. So tell me, why would you expect the latter?
     
  5. Feb 26, 2006 #4
    Well, at least you could point some links.
     
  6. Feb 26, 2006 #5

    HallsofIvy

    User Avatar
    Staff Emeritus
    Science Advisor

    Or you could look at the definition of the differential in any calculus book:

    [tex]df(x,y,z)= \frac{\partial f}{\partial x}dx+ \frac{\partial f}{\partial y}dy+ \frac{\partial f}{\partial z}dz[/tex]
    which, if you go back to the definition of the partial derivatives, is the formula I gave.
     
  7. Feb 26, 2006 #6
    Whoops, we've got a communication problem here, it seems.
    I know that this is the definition, and I've written it before you as well. My question is: why? What geometry/mathematical quantity does this correntponds to?
     
  8. Mar 1, 2006 #7
    From what I've found, it should be like this:
    [tex]df(x,y,z)= \frac{\partial f}{\partial x}dx \vec{i} + \frac{\partial f}{\partial y}dy \vec{j} + \frac{\partial f}{\partial z}dz \vec{k} [/tex]
    But this way, for the magnitude of this df, we gotta multiply (dot product) df with itself and square root...
     
  9. Mar 1, 2006 #8
    Just picture f as a function of two variables instead of three; z = f(x,y). Thus f can be represented by a surface S in 3 space. The total differential df in the equation
    [tex]df(x,y)= \frac{\partial f}{\partial x}dx+ \frac{\partial f}{\partial y}dy[/tex]
    would represent the change in the z component of the tangent plane T of f at a point P at coordinates (x,y,z) as we go to some other point P' at (x+delta x,y+delta y,f(x+delta x,y+delta y)). In this case, since delta x and delta y are independent variables, we can say dx=delta x and dy=delta y; i.e dx and dy can be actual distance values. Notice that df is related to the z component of points in T but delta f is related to the z component of points in the surface that f generates.

    It's even easier to picture if you just consider f as function of one variable: y=f(x). Though you lose the "partial" nature of the derivitive, the geometric picture you were looking for is still there. For example, you can picture some curved line that f generates and some tangent line T at a point P at (x, f(x)). If you take another point on the curve P' at (x+delta x, f(x+delta x)), dy would represent the verticle distance between a horizontal line through P and the tangent line T. In other words, dy would represent the distance that T changes in the y direction for some change dx=delta x in the x direction. We could imagine an animal called delta y (as distinct from dy) that represents the distance from the horizontal line through point P to the CURVE (rather than the tangent line T).

    Why would I even begin to set here and type all that??? :surprised
     
Know someone interested in this topic? Share this thread via Reddit, Google+, Twitter, or Facebook

Have something to add?



Similar Discussions: Partial differentiation
Loading...