Question about total derivative/chain rule

  • Context: Graduate 
  • Thread starter Thread starter mSSM
  • Start date Start date
Join the discussion
Ask a follow-up here, or get your own question answered by working scientists, mathematicians and engineers — people, not an autocomplete.
Real named experts · corrections over time · the nuance an AI answer skips
4 replies · 2K views
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 [itex]\lambda=\lambda(t)[/itex]. I am not so sure about [itex]S[/itex] (which is somewhat my problem):
[tex]\frac{\mathrm{d}S}{\mathrm{d}t} = \left( \frac{\mathrm{d}\lambda}{\mathrm{d}t} \right)^2[/tex]

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

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

But if I now assume that:
[tex]\frac{\mathrm{d}S}{\mathrm{d}t}\frac{\mathrm{d}t}{\mathrm{d}\lambda} = \frac{\mathrm{d}S}{\mathrm{d}\lambda}[/tex]
doesn't that in turn mean that [itex]t[/itex] is a function of [itex]\lambda[/itex]? Mathematically this seams sounds (to me), but physically this does not make so much sense, if [itex]t[/itex] is the time.
 
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 [itex]t[/itex] 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. :)