Question in Partial differential equation.

Click For Summary

Discussion Overview

The discussion revolves around the application of the Chain Rule in the context of partial differential equations, specifically when transitioning from Cartesian to polar coordinates. Participants are examining the correct formulation of the second derivative of a function in polar coordinates and how it relates to the expressions provided in a textbook.

Discussion Character

  • Technical explanation
  • Debate/contested
  • Mathematical reasoning

Main Points Raised

  • One participant presents a derivation of the second derivative in polar coordinates and questions the correctness of the textbook's approach, suggesting it should include the theta component.
  • Another participant agrees with the initial claim, stating that the textbook's expression is incorrect.
  • A later reply clarifies that the textbook does not simply use the derivative with respect to r, but rather differentiates the entire expression with respect to x, which is a different approach.
  • Some participants propose that both the textbook's method and the initial suggestion are valid strategies for applying the Chain Rule, highlighting that the choice of method can vary.
  • There is a discussion about the implications of using the Chain Rule once versus multiple times during differentiation, with participants exploring the consequences of each approach.
  • One participant emphasizes the importance of recognizing how derivatives of r and theta with respect to x affect the differentiation process.

Areas of Agreement / Disagreement

Participants express differing views on the correctness of the textbook's approach versus the initial suggestion. While some agree that both methods can be valid, there is no consensus on which is the preferred or correct method.

Contextual Notes

Participants note that the discussion hinges on the interpretation of the Chain Rule and the application of derivatives in polar coordinates, which may depend on specific definitions and assumptions made in the textbook.

yungman
Messages
5,741
Reaction score
291
For polar coordinates, ##u(x,y)=u(r,\theta)##. Using Chain Rule:

[tex]\frac{\partial u}{\partial x}=\frac{\partial u}{\partial r}\frac{\partial r}{\partial x}+\frac{\partial u}{\partial \theta}\frac{\partial \theta}{\partial x}[/tex]
The book gave

[tex]\frac{\partial ^2 u}{\partial x^2}=\frac{\partial }{\partial x}\left(\frac{\partial u}{\partial x}\right)=\frac{\partial }{\partial r}\left( \frac{\partial u}{\partial r}\frac{\partial r}{\partial x}+\frac{\partial u}{\partial \theta}\frac{\partial \theta}{\partial x}\right)[/tex]

But should it be like this according to the first equation using Chain Rule? That it has to include the ##\theta## part?:
[tex]\frac{\partial ^2 u}{\partial x^2}=\frac{\partial }{\partial r}\left(\frac{\partial u}{\partial x}\right)\frac{\partial r}{\partial x}+\frac{\partial }{\partial \theta}\left(\frac{\partial u}{\partial x}\right)\frac{\partial \theta}{\partial x}[/tex]
I just follow the form like the first equation. If I am wrong, can you explain why?

Thanks
 
Last edited:
Physics news on Phys.org
If your book actually wrote that nonsense, throw it in the fire.
You are most certainly correct that it is the latter expression one should use.
 
Thanks for the reply. This is the scanned copy of the book. this is "Partial Differential Equation" by Asmar. A book used by San Jose State.

This is part of the derivation of
[tex]\nabla^2u=\frac{\partial^2 u}{\partial r^2}+\frac {1}{r}\frac{\partial u}{\partial r}+\frac{1}{r^2}\frac{\partial ^2 u}{\partial r^2}[/tex]
 

Attachments

  • PDE1.jpg
    PDE1.jpg
    63.5 KB · Views: 509
yungman said:
The book gave

[tex]\frac{\partial ^2 u}{\partial x^2}=\frac{\partial }{\partial x}\left(\frac{\partial u}{\partial x}\right)=\frac{\partial }{\partial r}\left( \frac{\partial u}{\partial r}\frac{\partial r}{\partial x}+\frac{\partial u}{\partial \theta}\frac{\partial \theta}{\partial x}\right)[/tex]

Thanks

yungman said:
Thanks for the reply. This is the scanned copy of the book. this is "Partial Differential Equation" by Asmar. A book used by San Jose State.

This is part of the derivation of
[tex]\nabla^2u=\frac{\partial^2 u}{\partial r^2}+\frac {1}{r}\frac{\partial u}{\partial r}+\frac{1}{r^2}\frac{\partial ^2 u}{\partial r^2}[/tex]
The book does NOT say what you say it said in your first post.
 
In your FIRST post, you say that your book used merely d/dr, but it doesn't do that at all.

It performs x-derivations on the WHOLE expression, and that's completely different.
 
Now, YOUR suggestion is STILL correct:

What you say is that we basically CAN replace operators:
[tex]\frac{\partial}{\partial{x}}=\frac{\partial{r}}{\partial{x}} \frac{\partial}{\partial{r}} +\frac{\partial\theta} {\partial{x}}\frac{\partial}{\partial\theta}[/tex]

Your book, however, choose to use the second x-differentiation in full, rather than switching operators in the middle of the process.

BOTH strategies are correct
 
arildno said:
The book does NOT say what you say it said in your first post.

If you see my attachment, I wrote it in green, it's exactly what I said. the book just use product rule and only differentiated by x, not with ##\theta##.
 
Yes, it differentiates (du/dx) with respect to x, but NOT what you wrote in your first post, with respect to "r".
So, NO, it is NOT exactly what you said.
Read your first post again.
 
arildno said:
Now, YOUR suggestion is STILL correct:

What you say is that we basically CAN replace operators:
[tex]\frac{\partial}{\partial{x}}=\frac{\partial{r}}{\partial{x}} \frac{\partial}{\partial{r}} +\frac{\partial\theta} {\partial{x}}\frac{\partial}{\partial\theta}[/tex]

Your book, however, choose to use the second x-differentiation in full, rather than switching operators in the middle of the process.

BOTH strategies are correct

I think I understand now. You only use Chain Rule ONCE in the operation. That is you only perform this once per operation:
[tex]\frac{\partial}{\partial{x}}=\frac{\partial{r}}{\partial{x}} \frac{\partial}{\partial{r}} +\frac{\partial\theta} {\partial{x}}\frac{\partial}{\partial\theta}[/tex]

So if I do it my way:
[tex]\frac{\partial ^2 u}{\partial x^2}=\frac{\partial }{\partial r}\left(\frac{\partial u}{\partial x}\right)\frac{\partial r}{\partial x}+\frac{\partial }{\partial \theta}\left(\frac{\partial u}{\partial x}\right)\frac{\partial \theta}{\partial x}[/tex]
Then the next step is just a simple differentiation respect to ##r##
[tex]\frac{\partial }{\partial r}\left(\frac{\partial u}{\partial x}\right)[/tex]
and [tex]\frac{\partial }{\partial \theta}\left(\frac{\partial u}{\partial x}\right)[/tex]
where it is a simple differentiation respect to ##\theta##. No more Chain Rule as I use it right at the beginning.What the book did, it did the simple differentiation respect to x first,
[tex]\frac{\partial ^2 u}{\partial x^2}=\frac{\partial }{\partial x}\left(\frac{\partial u}{\partial x}\right)[/tex]
then apply the chain rule to each part.
 
  • #10
Remember that you have in your method, for example,
[tex]\frac{\partial{r}}{\partial{x}}=\cos\theta[/tex]
So that:
[tex]\frac{\partial}{\partial\theta} (\frac{\partial{r}}{\partial{x}})=-\sin\theta[/tex]
and so on.
 

Similar threads

  • · Replies 3 ·
Replies
3
Views
4K
  • · Replies 17 ·
Replies
17
Views
3K
  • · Replies 5 ·
Replies
5
Views
2K
  • · Replies 3 ·
Replies
3
Views
3K
  • · Replies 1 ·
Replies
1
Views
3K
  • · Replies 1 ·
Replies
1
Views
3K
  • · Replies 3 ·
Replies
3
Views
2K
  • · Replies 16 ·
Replies
16
Views
3K
  • · Replies 3 ·
Replies
3
Views
2K
  • · Replies 3 ·
Replies
3
Views
4K