Question: How can I calculate the steepest slope of a hill using its equation?

Noob.com
Messages
13
Reaction score
0
Equation of the height of the hill
z = 2xy - 3x^2 -4y^2 -18x + 28y +12
z: Height of the hill
x: Distance East
y: distance South

Question: In which compass direction is the slope at x = y = 1 steepest?

My question: What does this suppose to mean? The vector that is tangent to that point pointing to the top of the hill? If so how do I do that?

Note: I have already calculated the critical point of the hill and the angle between the normal vector of the hill at x=y=1 and the z-axis.

Thanks!
 
Physics news on Phys.org
Take the gradient of the function where the del operator is

\vec{\nabla}=\hat{x}\frac{\partial}{\partial\mbox{x}}+\hat{y}\frac{\partial}{\partial\mbox{y}}+\hat{z}\frac{\partial}{\partial\mbox{z}}

The gradient gives the direction of most rapid change for w = f(x,y,z). In your case, z = f(x,y).
 
Gradient of z = (2y - 6x -18 , 2x - 8y +28, 0)

If I put x = y = 1 there, the answer would be (a,b,0) which is a straight line parrallel to z-axis. That doesn't make sense at all!
 
When x=y=1 you get

\vec{T}=-22\hat{x}+14\hat{y}

where the unit vector x is in the East direction and unit vector y is in the South direction. This gives 22 West by 14 South. Use arctan to find the angle these two components form and this will be the direction.
 
Oh so the compass lay on the horizontal direction. I thought it would be something in the z-direction too. Thanks!
 
Thread 'Need help understanding this figure on energy levels'
This figure is from "Introduction to Quantum Mechanics" by Griffiths (3rd edition). It is available to download. It is from page 142. I am hoping the usual people on this site will give me a hand understanding what is going on in the figure. After the equation (4.50) it says "It is customary to introduce the principal quantum number, ##n##, which simply orders the allowed energies, starting with 1 for the ground state. (see the figure)" I still don't understand the figure :( Here is...
Thread 'Understanding how to "tack on" the time wiggle factor'
The last problem I posted on QM made it into advanced homework help, that is why I am putting it here. I am sorry for any hassle imposed on the moderators by myself. Part (a) is quite easy. We get $$\sigma_1 = 2\lambda, \mathbf{v}_1 = \begin{pmatrix} 0 \\ 0 \\ 1 \end{pmatrix} \sigma_2 = \lambda, \mathbf{v}_2 = \begin{pmatrix} 1/\sqrt{2} \\ 1/\sqrt{2} \\ 0 \end{pmatrix} \sigma_3 = -\lambda, \mathbf{v}_3 = \begin{pmatrix} 1/\sqrt{2} \\ -1/\sqrt{2} \\ 0 \end{pmatrix} $$ There are two ways...

Similar threads

Back
Top