So, the property is not applicable to this problem.

Click For Summary

Homework Help Overview

The problem involves verifying the identity of the divergence of a vector field defined in terms of the radial distance in three-dimensional space. The original poster is attempting to apply a property from their textbook to simplify the expression but encounters a discrepancy in the expected result.

Discussion Character

  • Conceptual clarification, Assumption checking, Mathematical reasoning

Approaches and Questions Raised

  • Participants discuss the application of the divergence operator and the product rule in vector calculus. Some suggest rewriting the expression in Cartesian coordinates, while others question the validity of the textbook property in this context.

Discussion Status

The discussion is ongoing, with participants exploring different interpretations of the problem and the application of mathematical properties. Some guidance has been offered regarding the use of the product rule, but confusion remains about the original poster's application of the property.

Contextual Notes

There is mention of the Del operator and its behavior in relation to the property from the textbook, indicating a potential misunderstanding of how certain mathematical operations interact in this context.

Nat3
Messages
69
Reaction score
0

Homework Statement


[tex]\vec r = <x, y, z>, r = \left | \vec r \right |[/tex]

The problem is, verify the identity:

[tex]\nabla \cdot (r\vec r) = 4r[/tex]


Homework Equations


My book has the following property:
[tex](c\vec a)\cdot \vec b = c(\vec a \cdot \vec b)[/tex]


The Attempt at a Solution



I tried using the above property to rewrite the problem as:
[tex]r(\nabla \cdot\vec r)[/tex]

But that gives 3r and the correct answer is 4r.

Why does the property not work? How should I correctly solve the problem?

Thanks for your advice.
 
Physics news on Phys.org
You need to use the product rule.
[tex] r \vec r[/tex] is <sqrt(x^2+y^2+z^2)x,sqrt(x^2+y^2+z^2)y,sqrt(x^2+y^2+z^2)z>. You need to use the product rule to evaluate the divergence. Equivalently div(r vec r)=grad(r).vec r+r*div(vec r). Sorry about my bad TeX skills. But you are missing the first term.
 
Last edited:
Have you tried writing the equation out in cartesian coordinates, do the deravative, and work back to polar coordinates again?
 
But why doesn't the property from my textbook work? I understand that the way Dick did it, distributing the r inside the vector, I would need to use the product rule when differentiating, but according to the property I listed I shouldn't have to do that.

I'm really confused!
 
Nat3 said:
But why doesn't the property from my textbook work? I understand that the way Dick did it, distributing the r inside the vector, I would need to use the product rule when differentiating, but according to the property I listed I shouldn't have to do that.

I'm really confused!

I'm afraid that the Del operator and indeed derivation in general do not simply comply with your property.
The Del operator may be written as a vector, and in a number of aspects it behaves like one, but in this case it doesn't.

More specifically, you cannot bring a factor outside of a derivation, if that factor is relevant to derivation (that is, not a constant).
 

Similar threads

  • · Replies 9 ·
Replies
9
Views
2K
  • · Replies 5 ·
Replies
5
Views
2K
  • · Replies 4 ·
Replies
4
Views
2K
  • · Replies 3 ·
Replies
3
Views
2K
  • · Replies 13 ·
Replies
13
Views
4K
  • · Replies 3 ·
Replies
3
Views
2K
Replies
3
Views
2K
  • · Replies 6 ·
Replies
6
Views
3K
  • · Replies 5 ·
Replies
5
Views
4K
  • · Replies 5 ·
Replies
5
Views
2K