Understanding Del Operation on Vector U Without Dot or Cross Product

AI Thread Summary
The discussion revolves around the confusion regarding the operation of the del operator on the vector U without using dot or cross products. Participants clarify that the left-hand side of the equation represents a scalar operator acting on the vector U, while the right-hand side involves the gradient of U, which is a tensor. It is emphasized that the gradient of a vector results in a tensor, and its contraction with another vector yields a vector. The original poster ultimately resolves their confusion by verifying their calculations and recognizing a mistake in their earlier work. The conversation highlights the nuances of applying the gradient operator in vector calculus.
seanl
Messages
4
Reaction score
0
hi,

I'm trying to follow a derivation in a paper and this equation is confusing me:

(u'.\nabla)U = (\nablaU).u'

Where U and u' are velocities.

The operation of del on the vector U without a dot or cross product is giving me some grief. Can someone explain how this works to me.

Thanks

Sean
 
Physics news on Phys.org
Is the quantity that's equated a vector or a scalar? I would read it like this.

(\nabla u)_{ij} \equiv \frac{\partial u_i}{\partial x_j}

In which case, the equivalence you show up there with indices in place would look like this.

\left(u'_j \frac{\partial}{\partial x_j} \right) u_i \equiv \left(\frac{\partial}{\partial x_k} u_i \right) u'_k
 
both sides are scalars if that's what you're asking.

My experience with index notation is kind of limited so I'm not sure exactly what that first equation you've written represents, could you expand it out in terms of Ux, Uy, Uz and dx, dy and dz so I'm certain I'm interpreting that correctly
 
Del on it's own like that is the gradient operator (grad).
It simply means the slope or rate of change with distance in the directions x,y,z. so d/dx, d/dy d/dz (I don't know how to show partials in this editor - sorry)
Usually it operates on a scalar, (eg electric potential) to give a vector result (in that case, Electric field strength)
 
yeah but in this case its acting on a vector not a scalar. In the textbook i was looking at the only options for applying the grad operator to a vector field were a dot product or a cross product. The grad U term on the RHS of the equality i posted doesn't appear to be either and when i tried to verify the equality my results suggested that that grad U term should result in the vector (dUx/dx, dUy/dy, dUz/dz) if dotting it with u' is to make it equate to the LHS. That vector isn't the result of a cross product operation and, since its a vector, it obviously isn't the result of a dot product either. so I'm a bit confused as to what operation is being carried out there or if its just a convenient notation that I'm not used to.
 
Well, if U is a vector, the result of the grad operation is a a tensor - which seems unlikely in the context.

OTOH If U is a scalar it makes perfect sense.
The dot product of u' with del is a vector operator u'x d/dx : u'y d/dy : u'z d/dz,
acting on U gives (just for x) u'x dU/dx, which is the same as you would get for the second case - the dot product of vector u' with the grad of scalar U (also a vector).
 
Assuming your equation is correct, then both sides of the equation are vectors. The LHS is actually much easier to interpret if you are not used to tensor analysis (in fact, a similar expression occurs frequently in fluid dynamics).

The term in the parentheses on the LHS will give you u'_x d/dx + u'_y d/dy + u'_z d/dz (forgive the lack of Latex). This is simply a scalar operator that acts on each component U; remember, the x-component of U will be differentiated with respect to all three coordinates and so forth for the remaining components of U.

On the RHS the gradient of a vector is indeed a tensor (rank 2). It's contraction with a vector (i.e. rank 1 tensor) results in another vector.
 
AJ Bentley said:
Well, if U is a vector, the result of the grad operation is a a tensor
That's what I was assuming, but OP says that both sides of the equation are scalars, which doesn't make sense with a tensor.
 
ok thanks for all the help i managed to verify it. Turns out as well as not understanding exactly what gradU was i made a mistake in another part of my working so all good now!
 
Back
Top