Proving Vector Calculus Identities: Tips and Tricks

Click For Summary
The discussion focuses on proving the vector calculus identity div(øu) = ødivu + ugradø using index notation. A participant expresses uncertainty about where to start, having only basic knowledge of divergence. Another contributor suggests applying the definition of divergence to the expression and advises against using confusing symbols. The original poster eventually resolves their confusion by understanding the product rule and moves on to tackle another identity proof. The conversation highlights the importance of clarity in notation and the application of fundamental calculus principles.
bothcats
Messages
3
Reaction score
0

Homework Statement



div(øu) = ødivu + ugradø

Homework Equations



divergence of scalar field = f,ii
divergence of vector field = ui,i

The Attempt at a Solution



I've heard this is a simple proof, but this is my first one of 8 or so proofs I need to complete for homework, and I'm really not sure where to start. I know that div v = ∇ . v, but that's as far as I've gotten. We need to use Index Notation. Thoughts on where to start?
 
Physics news on Phys.org
bothcats said:

Homework Statement



div(øu) = ødivu + ugradø

Homework Equations



divergence of scalar field = f,ii
divergence of vector field = ui,i

The Attempt at a Solution



I've heard this is a simple proof, but this is my first one of 8 or so proofs I need to complete for homework, and I'm really not sure where to start. I know that div v = ∇ . v, but that's as far as I've gotten. We need to use Index Notation. Thoughts on where to start?
Why not start by applying the definition of the divergence of a vector field to ##\phi\mathbf u##? Please don't use the empty set symbol instead of ##\phi##. I found it very confusing, and it took me some time to understand what you meant. If you don't use LaTeX, and can't find another way to type a ##\phi##, then just call the scalar field f or something like that.
 
Sorry for the confusion. I'll be more careful with the lettering in the future. I've actually figured this one out now. It was the product rule that I wasn't sure about, now that I've worked it through (and several other identity proofs). Now, I'm on the divergence of (u cross v) identity.

Thanks!
 
Question: A clock's minute hand has length 4 and its hour hand has length 3. What is the distance between the tips at the moment when it is increasing most rapidly?(Putnam Exam Question) Answer: Making assumption that both the hands moves at constant angular velocities, the answer is ## \sqrt{7} .## But don't you think this assumption is somewhat doubtful and wrong?

Similar threads

Replies
4
Views
2K
  • · Replies 4 ·
Replies
4
Views
2K
  • · Replies 5 ·
Replies
5
Views
2K
  • · Replies 11 ·
Replies
11
Views
4K
  • · Replies 3 ·
Replies
3
Views
2K
  • · Replies 6 ·
Replies
6
Views
2K
Replies
2
Views
1K
  • · Replies 12 ·
Replies
12
Views
2K
  • · Replies 2 ·
Replies
2
Views
11K
  • · Replies 8 ·
Replies
8
Views
2K