Solving Notation & Convention Confusion in Differentials

Click For Summary
The discussion centers on clarifying the notation and conventions used in differential equations, particularly the distinction between the operator d/dx and the differential dx. The equation d(f(x,y)) = h(x,y)dx raises questions about the integration process, specifically whether the integration is solely with respect to x and how it relates to the function f(x,y). Participants express confusion about the implications of integrating the left side and whether it aligns with the right side's integration. Additionally, the equivalence of d(f(x,y)) = h(x,y)dx and (d/dx)(f(x,y)) = h(x,y) is debated, with suggestions that the former may not be meaningful in isolation. Overall, the conversation highlights the complexities of differential notation and the need for clarity in its application.
hideelo
Messages
88
Reaction score
15
I am currently reading "Differential Equatons with Applications" by Ritger and Rose, and I need some clarification about some notation and convention that they are using. I think it all stems from a lack of clarity of the difference between the operator d/dx and the "object" (I don't know what to call it, I don't really know what it is) dx

If I have an equation of the following form

d(f(x,y)) = h(x,y)dx

the approach they then take is to "integrate both sides" and they remain with the following equation

f(x,y) = g(x,y) + c where g(x,y) = ∫h(x,y)dx

the integration on the right is clearly with respect to x, I am not so clear as to what they are doing on the left however. It seems like they are asserting that the integral of the derivative of a function is the function itself. But with respect to what are they integrating it? Is this only with respect to x? If so then the answer is wrong since ∫ d(f(x,y))dx is in general not f(x,y) . Is this some sort of line integral and we are using gradient theorem? If so are we doing the same thing on the other side of the equation? I don't think so, as we are only integrating with respect to x

The other confusion comes from the following, if have the same initial equation as above, d(f(x,y)) = h(x,y)dx is that the same as (d/dx)(f(x,y)) = h(x,y)? If yes, how so? How about if I have something of the following form ∂/∂x (f(x,y)) = h(x,y)?

TIA
 
Physics news on Phys.org
hideelo said:
d(f(x,y)) = h(x,y)dx
I'm not sure that is meaningful in isolation. It certainly looks like it might mean ∂/∂x (f(x,y)) = h(x,y), but I can imagine other circumstances. E.g. we might be considering stepping a small distance along a path in the XY plane, so that in general d(f(x,y)) = h(x,y)dx+k(x,y).dy, but that it happens in this case that k(x,y) (at some point) is zero.
Assuming it does mean ∂/∂x (f(x,y)) = h(x,y), we can integrate wrt x to get f(x,y)=∫h(x,y).dx+k(y), where k is a 'function of integration', analogous to a constant of integration.
hideelo said:
∫ d(f(x,y))dx is in general not f(x,y)
∫ d(f(x,y))dx does not parse. You mean just ∫ d(f(x,y)).
 

Similar threads

  • · Replies 3 ·
Replies
3
Views
4K
  • · Replies 2 ·
Replies
2
Views
4K
  • · Replies 1 ·
Replies
1
Views
2K
  • · Replies 3 ·
Replies
3
Views
1K
  • · Replies 1 ·
Replies
1
Views
3K
  • · Replies 20 ·
Replies
20
Views
3K
  • · Replies 4 ·
Replies
4
Views
3K
  • · Replies 5 ·
Replies
5
Views
3K
  • · Replies 5 ·
Replies
5
Views
2K
  • · Replies 9 ·
Replies
9
Views
3K