Vector calculus evaluation question

Click For Summary

Homework Help Overview

The discussion revolves around evaluating the gradient of functions involving dot products and cross products in vector calculus. The original poster presents two questions related to the gradient of a product of functions and the gradient of a cross product raised to a power.

Discussion Character

  • Exploratory, Mathematical reasoning, Assumption checking

Approaches and Questions Raised

  • Participants discuss the application of product and chain rules in calculating gradients. Some express confusion over simplifications and the introduction of terms like nabla r. Others suggest breaking down the functions into components to facilitate the gradient evaluation.

Discussion Status

The conversation is ongoing, with various interpretations of the gradient calculations being explored. Some participants have shared their approaches and results, while others are questioning the correctness of specific steps and terms used in the calculations.

Contextual Notes

There is mention of limitations regarding the use of tensor analysis, and some participants indicate that they have not yet covered certain advanced topics, which may affect their understanding of the problems presented.

641354337
Messages
4
Reaction score
0

Homework Statement


Q1. Evaluate grad(f) for the function f([tex]\underline{r}[/tex])=([tex]\underline{a}[/tex] dot [tex]\underline{r}[/tex]) ([tex]\underline{b}[/tex] dot [tex]\underline{r}[/tex])

Q2. If [tex]\underline{c}[/tex] is a constant vector, show that grad |[tex]\underline{c}[/tex] cross [tex]\underline{r}[/tex]| ^n = n |[tex]\underline{c}[/tex] cross [tex]\underline{r}[/tex]| ^(n-2) *[tex]\underline{c}[/tex] cross ([tex]\underline{r}[/tex] cross [tex]\underline{c}[/tex] )

Homework Equations


dot product and cross product identities
formula for grad f

The Attempt at a Solution


Q1, I tried to expand it use product rule but simplified it back to where I started, I don't see how I can simplify the result.
Q2, used chain rule got n |[tex]\underline{c}[/tex] cross [tex]\underline{r}[/tex]| ^(n-2) *([tex]\underline{c}[/tex] cross [tex]\underline{r}[/tex] )
btw I have proven that grad r^n = n * r^ (n-2) * [tex]\underline{r}[/tex], not sure if this is correct.

This is my first post, hopefully it is understandable..
 
Last edited:
Physics news on Phys.org
[tex] \nabla(\vec{a}\cdot\vec{r})(\vec{b}\cdot\vec{r})=<br /> \frac{d}{dx_{i}}a_{j}x_{j}b_{k}x_{k}=<br /> a_{j}b_{k}(\frac{dx_{j}}{dx_{i}}x_{k}+\frac{dx_{k}}{dx_{i}}x_{j})=<br /> a_{j}b_{k}(\delta_{ij}x_{k}+\delta_{ik}x_{j})=<br /> \vec{a}(\vec{b}\cdot\vec{r})+\vec{b}(\vec{a}\cdot\vec{r})[/tex]
 
Last edited:
eshaw said:
[tex] \nabla(\vec{a}\cdot\vec{r})(\vec{b}\cdot\vec{r})=<br /> \frac{d}{dx_{i}}a_{j}x_{j}b_{k}x_{k}=<br /> a_{j}b_{k}(\frac{dx_{j}}{dx_{i}}x_{k}+\frac{dx_{k}}{dx_{i}}x_{j})=<br /> a_{j}b_{k}(\delta_{ij}x_{k}+\delta_{ik}x_{j})=<br /> \vec{a}(\vec{b}\cdot\vec{r})+\vec{b}(\vec{a}\cdot\vec{r})[/tex]


but i got [tex][\vec{a}(\vec{b}\cdot\vec{r})+\vec{b}(\vec{a}\cdot\vec{r})]\nabla\vec{r}[/tex]

btw i havnt done tensors yet, so I've used the basic property of [tex]\nabla[/tex]
 
The only honest way you can do it without tensor analysis, is by breaking it up into all the pieces. That is, take the dot product of the vectors a and r which is a1x+a2y+a3z and multiply it by the dot product of b and r. Then the gradient of that is (df/dx,df/dy,df/dz) and then if you rearrange the terms and you will get the answer that I got. I'm kind of curious how you got the nabla r term. I'll try to give you some useful relations that I used to solve the second problem. I'm not very adept at using the Latex, so it would take me to long to write out the whole solution.
 
[tex] \vec{c} \times \vec{r} = \left| \vec{c} \right| \left| \vec{r} \right| \sin \theta \vec{n}[/tex]
[tex] \left| \vec{c} \times \vec{r} \right| = \left| \vec{c} \right| \left| \vec{r}\right| \sin \theta[/tex]
[tex] \left| \vec{r} \right| = \sqrt{\vec{r} \cdot \vec{r}} = r [/tex]
[tex] \vec{r} = r\frac{\vec{r}}{r}=r\vec{n}=\left| \vec{r} \right| \vec{n}[/tex]
 
eshaw said:
The only honest way you can do it without tensor analysis, is by breaking it up into all the pieces. That is, take the dot product of the vectors a and r which is a1x+a2y+a3z and multiply it by the dot product of b and r. Then the gradient of that is (df/dx,df/dy,df/dz) and then if you rearrange the terms and you will get the answer that I got. I'm kind of curious how you got the nabla r term. I'll try to give you some useful relations that I used to solve the second problem. I'm not very adept at using the Latex, so it would take me to long to write out the whole solution.



I have used chain rule so my first step is
[tex]\nabla(\vec{a}\cdot\vec{r})(\vec{b}\cdot\vec{r})=(\vec{b}\cdot\vec{r})\nabla(\vec{a}\cdot\vec{r})+(\vec{a}\cdot\vec{r})\nabla(\vec{b}\cdot\vec{r})[/tex]

I think this is correct, so if ur result is true it means that [tex]\nabla(\vec{a}\cdot\vec{r}=\vec{a}[/tex] ?
 
eshaw said:
[tex] \vec{c} \times \vec{r} = \left| \vec{c} \right| \left| \vec{r} \right| \sin \theta \vec{n}[/tex]
[tex] \left| \vec{c} \times \vec{r} \right| = \left| \vec{c} \right| \left| \vec{r}\right| \sin \theta[/tex]
[tex] \left| \vec{r} \right| = \sqrt{\vec{r} \cdot \vec{r}} = r [/tex]
[tex] \vec{r} = r\frac{\vec{r}}{r}=r\vec{n}=\left| \vec{r} \right| \vec{n}[/tex]

Thanks! i think I've got it now
 
[tex] \nabla(\vec{a}\cdot\vec{r})=\nabla(a_{1}x+a_{2}y+a_{3}z)=a_{1}\vec{i}+a_{2}\vec{j}+a_{3}\vec{k}=\vec{a}[/tex]
 

Similar threads

  • · Replies 4 ·
Replies
4
Views
3K
  • · Replies 10 ·
Replies
10
Views
7K
  • · Replies 29 ·
Replies
29
Views
5K
Replies
22
Views
3K
  • · Replies 3 ·
Replies
3
Views
3K
  • · Replies 2 ·
Replies
2
Views
1K
  • · Replies 5 ·
Replies
5
Views
5K
Replies
3
Views
4K
Replies
10
Views
3K
  • · Replies 6 ·
Replies
6
Views
10K