Proof of Vector Field Identity: (u.∇)u = ∇(1/2u^2)+w∧u

  • Thread starter Thread starter connor415
  • Start date Start date
Click For Summary

Homework Help Overview

The discussion revolves around proving a vector field identity involving the vector field \( u \) and its properties, specifically the expression \( (u \cdot \nabla)u = \nabla(1/2u^2) + w \wedge u \), where \( w = \nabla \wedge u \). Participants are exploring the mathematical reasoning behind the expansion and manipulation of both sides of the equation.

Discussion Character

  • Mathematical reasoning, Problem interpretation, Assumption checking

Approaches and Questions Raised

  • Participants discuss expanding both sides of the equation in index notation and question the proper treatment of indices. Some express confusion about specific steps in the expansion process, particularly regarding the term \( w \wedge u \) and its representation in index notation.

Discussion Status

The discussion is ongoing, with participants sharing their approaches and clarifying notation. Some have attempted to expand the expression independently, while others seek guidance on specific methods. There is a mix of interpretations and attempts to align on the notation used for vectors and their operations.

Contextual Notes

Participants are navigating different notational conventions for vectors and indices, which may affect their understanding of the problem. There is an emphasis on adhering to forum rules regarding effort and collaboration, with reminders to engage in the problem-solving process actively.

connor415
Messages
24
Reaction score
0
u is a vector field,

show that

(u.∇)u = ∇(1/2u^2)+w∧u

Where w=∇∧u
 
Physics news on Phys.org
expand both sides

RHS \frac{1}{2} \partial_i u_j u_j - \epsilon_{ijk} w_k u_j
=\frac{1}{2} \partial_i u_j^2 - \epsilon_{ijk} \epsilon_{klm} u_j \partial_l u_m
=\frac{1}{2} 2 u_j \partial_i u_j - \left( \delta_{il} \delta_{jm} - \delta_{jl} \delta_{im} \right) u_j \partial_l u_m
=u_j \partial_i u_j - \left( u_j \partial_i u_j - u_j \partial_j u_i \right)

so that side should be fairly easy to finish off and then just expand the LHS in index notation and show they match up and you're done.
 
Last edited:
Sorry I am still confused. How did you expand w∧u?
 
ps I tried to do it starting from the left, could you do it that way please? Thanks
 
oh and were j and m supposed to be upper case in line 3 of your method?
 
connor415 said:
ps I tried to do it starting from the left, could you do it[/color] that way please? Thanks

As per forum rules, you shouldn't be asking latentcorpse to do your homework for you...you need to make an effort yourself.

What is \mathbf{\nabla}\wedge\textbf{u} in index notation?...How about \mathbf{\nabla}\left(\frac{1}{2}u^2\right)?
 
those indices were meant to be subscript, sorry.

it will be easiest to expand the LHS and the RHS separately and then show that the two expansions are easiest rather than trying to expand one side and rearrange it to give the other side.
 
Im not asking him to do my homework. I did it myself. Just his method was different to mine so was asking him to do it same way.
 
how did u do it then? using indices as well, surely?
 
  • #10
no magic
 
  • #11
well in answer to your earlier question about the expansion of w \wedge u

(w \wedge u)_i = \epsilon_{ijk} w_j u_k = - \epsilon_{ijk} u_j w_k

i used the antisymmetry of the Levi Civita in order to have the k index on the w. just because it's easier to expand the w that way...
 
  • #12
Yeah me too! Nah youve lost me sorry. Cheers for the effort nonetheless
 
  • #13
have u seen Levi Civita symbols before?
 
  • #14
connor415,

People use different notation for vectors. Can you show us how you would expand the dot product of two vectors, u.v?

I.e.,

u.v = ux*vx + uy*vy + uz*vz​

or
u.v = ui*vi + uj*vj + uk*vk​

or something else?
 

Similar threads

  • · Replies 8 ·
Replies
8
Views
1K
  • · Replies 5 ·
Replies
5
Views
2K
Replies
0
Views
1K
  • · Replies 13 ·
Replies
13
Views
2K
Replies
5
Views
2K
  • · Replies 1 ·
Replies
1
Views
2K
  • · Replies 1 ·
Replies
1
Views
1K
  • · Replies 5 ·
Replies
5
Views
2K
  • · Replies 7 ·
Replies
7
Views
3K
  • · Replies 1 ·
Replies
1
Views
2K