Question about total derivative/chain rule

  • Thread starter Thread starter mSSM
  • Start date Start date
AI Thread Summary
The discussion revolves around the application of the total derivative and chain rule in the context of adiabatic processes as described in Landau's work. The user is uncertain about the relationship between the variables S and λ, particularly how time (t) might be treated as a function of distance (λ). Participants suggest that it is mathematically valid to consider time as a function of distance, especially when relating mechanical quantities. The conversation emphasizes that treating quantities like length or distance in this manner is acceptable, even for macroscopic quantities. Overall, the discussion highlights the interplay between mathematical formulations and physical interpretations in statistical physics.
mSSM
Messages
31
Reaction score
1
The following actually comes from Landau's 3rd Edit. Statistical Physics Part 1, Paragraph on Adiabatic Processes, Page 39.

I have the following two equations, where \lambda=\lambda(t). I am not so sure about S (which is somewhat my problem):
\frac{\mathrm{d}S}{\mathrm{d}t} = \left( \frac{\mathrm{d}\lambda}{\mathrm{d}t} \right)^2

Which is supposed to mean:
\frac{\mathrm{d}S}{\mathrm{d}\lambda} = \frac{\mathrm{d}\lambda}{\mathrm{d}t}

Now, I thought that what is essentially being done there is multiplying the first equation such that we get:
\frac{\mathrm{d}S}{\mathrm{d}t}\frac{\mathrm{d}t}{\mathrm{d}\lambda} = \frac{\mathrm{d}\lambda}{\mathrm{d}t}

But if I now assume that:
\frac{\mathrm{d}S}{\mathrm{d}t}\frac{\mathrm{d}t}{\mathrm{d}\lambda} = \frac{\mathrm{d}S}{\mathrm{d}\lambda}
doesn't that in turn mean that t is a function of \lambda? Mathematically this seams sounds (to me), but physically this does not make so much sense, if t is the time.
 
Mathematics news on Phys.org
welcome to pf!

hi mSSM! welcome to pf! :smile:
mSSM said:
Mathematically this seams sounds (to me), but physically this does not make so much sense, if t is the time.

suppose λ is distance

why shouldn't time be a function of distance? :wink:
 


sin
tiny-tim said:
hi mSSM! welcome to pf! :smile:suppose λ is distance

why shouldn't time be a function of distance? :wink:

Thanks! :) Okay, I guess you could turn it that way. So essentially you say that we simply associate every instant of time with a certain "distance"... Since in my case the distance (=external condition) is a mechanical quantity I guess this would be sound.

Would something like that still be acceptable for a macroscopic quantity?
 
mSSM said:
Would something like that still be acceptable for a macroscopic quantity?

i'm not sure i understand that sentence :confused:

a quantity is a quantity

why would length (or any other quantity) be unacceptable?
 
tiny-tim said:
i'm not sure i understand that sentence :confused:

a quantity is a quantity

why would length (or any other quantity) be unacceptable?

Yeah, you are right. I can't think of a reason why that shouldn't work. :)
 
Suppose ,instead of the usual x,y coordinate system with an I basis vector along the x -axis and a corresponding j basis vector along the y-axis we instead have a different pair of basis vectors ,call them e and f along their respective axes. I have seen that this is an important subject in maths My question is what physical applications does such a model apply to? I am asking here because I have devoted quite a lot of time in the past to understanding convectors and the dual...
Insights auto threads is broken atm, so I'm manually creating these for new Insight articles. In Dirac’s Principles of Quantum Mechanics published in 1930 he introduced a “convenient notation” he referred to as a “delta function” which he treated as a continuum analog to the discrete Kronecker delta. The Kronecker delta is simply the indexed components of the identity operator in matrix algebra Source: https://www.physicsforums.com/insights/what-exactly-is-diracs-delta-function/ by...
Back
Top