Solve Line Integral Question | Get Math Help from Physics Forums

Click For Summary
SUMMARY

The forum discussion focuses on understanding the computation of the potential function F(x,y) = axy + bx + cy + d, as presented by the author. Key points include the conditions for the existence of potential functions, specifically that the curl of the vector field must equal zero (∇ × f = 0). The discussion also addresses the negative sign in the expression ∂F/∂x = h(y) and the implications of using different conventions in defining potential functions.

PREREQUISITES
  • Understanding of vector calculus, specifically gradient and curl operations.
  • Familiarity with partial derivatives and their properties.
  • Knowledge of potential functions in physics and mathematics.
  • Basic concepts of line integrals and their applications.
NEXT STEPS
  • Study the properties of vector fields and the conditions for potential functions.
  • Learn about the implications of the curl operator in vector calculus.
  • Explore the relationship between line integrals and conservative fields.
  • Investigate different conventions in defining potential functions in physics.
USEFUL FOR

Students and professionals in mathematics, physics, and engineering who are seeking to deepen their understanding of vector calculus and potential theory.

WMDhamnekar
MHB
Messages
378
Reaction score
30
TL;DR
Let g(x) and h(y) be differentiable functions, and let f(x, y) = h(y)i+ g(x)j. Can f have a potential F(x, y)? If so, find it.

You may assume that F would be smooth.
(Hint: Consider the mixed partial derivatives of F.)
I don't have any idea about how to use the hint given by the author.
Author has given the answer to this question i-e F(x,y) = axy + bx + cy +d.
I don't understand how did the author compute this answer.

Would any member of Physics Forums enlighten me in this regard?

Any math help will be accepted.
 
Physics news on Phys.org
Because
## - \dfrac{\partial F}{\partial x} = h(y) ##
then
## \dfrac{\partial^2 F}{\partial x^2} = 0 ##

And we also have
##\dfrac{\partial^2 F}{\partial x \partial y } = \dfrac{\partial^2 F}{\partial y \partial x } ##

If you just want to show that the potential exists, then show that ##\vec \nabla \times \vec f = 0 ##
 
Last edited by a moderator:
  • Haha
Likes   Reactions: WMDhamnekar
drmalawi said:
Because
## - \dfrac{\partial F}{\partial x} = h(y) ##
then
## \dfrac{\partial^2 F}{\partial x^2} = 0 ##

And we also have
##\dfrac{\partial^2 F}{\partial x \partial y } = \dfrac{\partial^2 F}{\partial y \partial x } ##
Why is the sign negative for ## \frac{\partial{F}}{\partial{x}}= h(y)?## Would you explain that ?
 
WMDhamnekar said:
Why is the sign negative for ## \frac{\partial{F}}{\partial{x}}= h(y)?## Would you explain that ?

Isn't the potential F(x,y) defined as ##\vec f = - \vec \nabla F## ?
 
  • Informative
Likes   Reactions: WMDhamnekar
drmalawi said:
Isn't the potential F(x,y) defined as ##\vec f = - \vec \nabla F## ?
In the following corollary 4.6 ## \vec f \not= -\vec \nabla F ## Why?
1656595447021.png
 
WMDhamnekar said:
In the following corollary 4.6 ## \vec f \not= -\vec \nabla F ## Why?
View attachment 303550

Matter of convetion I guess, I have always used ##\vec f = - \vec \nabla F## as the definition as potential. But it does not matter, the math is the same, just follow your books conventions. And also -0 = 0 so...
 
Last edited by a moderator:

Similar threads

  • · Replies 38 ·
2
Replies
38
Views
4K
Replies
3
Views
2K
  • · Replies 45 ·
2
Replies
45
Views
5K
  • · Replies 1 ·
Replies
1
Views
2K
  • · Replies 11 ·
Replies
11
Views
3K
  • · Replies 13 ·
Replies
13
Views
3K
  • · Replies 3 ·
Replies
3
Views
1K
  • · Replies 6 ·
Replies
6
Views
4K
  • · Replies 5 ·
Replies
5
Views
3K
Replies
12
Views
2K