Time derivative of tensor expression

Click For Summary
SUMMARY

The discussion focuses on computing the time derivative of the tensor expression for electric multipole moments as described in deGroot's "Foundations of Electrodynamics." The key equation involves the time derivative of the delta function and the internal coordinates of a stable group of particles. The participants confirm that the total time derivative of the delta function is zero and explore the mathematical validity of applying the chain rule to the nabla operator within the context of the delta function. The conclusion is that the derivative can be expressed correctly when the operator is applied to a function independent of time.

PREREQUISITES
  • Understanding of tensor calculus and vector analysis
  • Familiarity with delta functions in physics
  • Knowledge of electric multipole moments
  • Proficiency in applying the chain rule in calculus
NEXT STEPS
  • Study the application of delta functions in electrodynamics
  • Learn about electric multipole expansions and their significance
  • Explore advanced topics in tensor calculus
  • Review the chain rule in the context of differential operators
USEFUL FOR

Physicists, mathematicians, and students studying electrodynamics, particularly those interested in tensor calculus and the dynamics of particle systems.

gitano
Messages
11
Reaction score
0
I was trying to compute the time derivative of the following expression:

[tex]\mathbf{p_k} = \sum_i e_{ki}\sum_{n=0}^{\infty} \frac{(-1)^n}{(n+1)!} \mathbf{r_{ki}}(\mathbf{r_{ki}\cdot \nabla})^n \delta(\mathbf{R_k}-\mathbf{R})[/tex]

I am following deGroot in his Foundations of Electrodynamics. He says, "Taking the derivative [itex]\partial_0 = \partial/\partial ct[/itex]" of the above equation, one finds

[tex]\partial_0 \mathbf{p_k} + \frac{1}{c} \mathbf{\dot{R}_k \cdot \nabla p_k} - \frac{1}{c} \sum_i e_{ki} \sum_{n=0}^{\infty}\frac{(-1)^n}{(n+1)!} (\mathbf{\dot{r}_{ki} r_{ki} \cdot \nabla } + n\mathbf{r_{ki}\dot{r}_{ki} \cdot \nabla})(\mathbf{r_{ki}\cdot \nabla})^{n-1} \delta(\mathbf{R_k}-\mathbf{R}) = 0[/tex]

since "the time derivative of the delta function is equal to [itex]-\mathbf{\dot{R}_k \cdot \nabla}[/itex] acting on it." By this I assume he means that the total time derivative of the delta function is 0.

Some context: deGroot is talking about a stable group of particles labeled by k. So [itex]\mathbf{R_{k}}[/itex] is the position of the center of mass of the group and the [itex]\mathbf{r_{ki}}[/itex] are the internal coordinates , which specify the positions of the constituent particles ki with respect to the stable group k. So we are dealing with the electric multipole moments of the group of particles. [itex]e_{ki}[/itex] is the charge of the ki particle.

This is my attempt (it seems above that he is taking the total derivative of both sides and subtracting one from the other):
Let's just focus on the [itex]\mathbf{r_{ki}}(\mathbf{r_{ki}\cdot \nabla})^n \delta(\mathbf{R_k}-\mathbf{R})[/itex] term. I get
[tex]\mathbf{\dot{r}_{ki}}(\mathbf{r_{ki}\cdot \nabla})^n \delta(\mathbf{R_k}-\mathbf{R}) + \mathbf{r_{ki}}\frac{d}{dt}[(\mathbf{r_{ki}\cdot \nabla})^n\delta(\mathbf{R_k}-\mathbf{R})][/tex]

So the remaining part is to find [tex]\mathbf{r_{ki}}\frac{d}{dt}[(\mathbf{r_{ki}\cdot \nabla})^n\delta(\mathbf{R_k}-\mathbf{R})][/tex] which according to deGroot should be [tex](n\mathbf{r_{ki}\dot{r}_{ki} \cdot \nabla})(\mathbf{r_{ki}\cdot \nabla})^{n-1} \delta(\mathbf{R_k}-\mathbf{R})[/tex]

This would usually make sense using the chain rule, but I don't immediately see how you can use the chain rule since the nabla operator is inside. The chain rule would give
[tex]\frac{d}{dt}[(\mathbf{r_{ki}\cdot \nabla})^n] = n (\mathbf{r_{ki}\cdot \nabla})^{n-1} \frac{d}{dt}(\mathbf{r_{ki}\cdot \nabla})[/tex]

Is it really mathematically correct to say that [itex]\frac{d}{dt}(\mathbf{r_{ki}\cdot \nabla}) = (\mathbf{\dot{r}_{ki}\cdot \nabla})[/itex]? Is it because you have to think of the operator being applied to the delta function first before taking the derivative and since the delta function is independent of time it makes no difference?
 
Physics news on Phys.org
gitano said:
Is it really mathematically correct to say that ddt(rki⋅∇)=(r˙ki⋅∇) \frac{d}{dt}(\mathbf{r_{ki}\cdot \nabla}) = (\mathbf{\dot{r}_{ki}\cdot \nabla}) ? Is it because you have to think of the operator being applied to the delta function first before taking the derivative and since the delta function is independent of time it makes no difference?
I think your guess as to the reason may be correct.

That is, perhaps it is not the case that ##
\frac{d}{dt}(\mathbf{r_{ki}\cdot \nabla}) = (\mathbf{\dot{r}_{ki}\cdot \nabla})##

but it is the case that
$$
\frac{d}{dt}\left[(\mathbf{r_{ki}\cdot \nabla})g(\mathbf{x})\right] = (\mathbf{\dot{r}_{ki}\cdot \nabla})g(\mathbf{x})$$
where ##g## is a function only of the variable ##\textbf{x}##, which does not involve ##t##.

Let's see:

$$\frac{d}{dt}\left[(\mathbf{r_{ki}\cdot \nabla})g(\mathbf{x})\right] =
\frac{d}{dt}\left[\mathbf{r_{ki}\cdot (\nabla}g(\mathbf{x}))\right] =
\frac{d}{dt}[\mathbf{r_{ki}]\cdot (\nabla}g(\mathbf{x}))
+
\mathbf{r_{ki}}\cdot \frac{d}{dt}[\nabla g(\mathbf{x})]
$$

$$
=
\mathbf{\dot{r}_{ki}\cdot (\nabla}g(\mathbf{x}))
+
\mathbf{r_{ki}}\cdot \mathbf{0}
=
\mathbf{\dot{r}_{ki}\cdot (\nabla}g(\mathbf{x})) =
(\mathbf{\dot{r}_{ki}\cdot \nabla})g(\mathbf{x})
$$

So it looks OK.
 

Similar threads

  • · Replies 5 ·
Replies
5
Views
1K
  • · Replies 2 ·
Replies
2
Views
4K
  • · Replies 1 ·
Replies
1
Views
2K
  • · Replies 3 ·
Replies
3
Views
3K
  • · Replies 13 ·
Replies
13
Views
2K
Replies
2
Views
2K
  • · Replies 4 ·
Replies
4
Views
4K
  • · Replies 5 ·
Replies
5
Views
2K
  • · Replies 1 ·
Replies
1
Views
990
  • · Replies 5 ·
Replies
5
Views
1K