What Does the Gradient Operator Really Mean?

utkarshakash
Gold Member
Messages
852
Reaction score
13

Homework Statement


I need some help regarding the gradient operator. I recently came across this statement while reading Griffith's Electrodynamics
"The gradient ∇T points in the direction of maximum increase of the function
T."


Wolfram Alpha also states that "The direction of ∇f is the orientation in which the directional derivative has the largest value and |∇f| is the value of that directional derivative. "

I'm finding it difficult to absorb this thing without any reasonable explanation. Can someone help?


Homework Equations





The Attempt at a Solution

 
Physics news on Phys.org
Take a scalar field, T(\vec{x}) and calculate the directional derivative in direction of the unit vector \vec{n} at a fixed point \vec{x}=\vec{x}_0. How is it related to the gradient? In which direction do have to choose \vec{n} such that (modulus of) the directional derivative becomes maximal?
 
Infinitum said:
I'm unsure whether you know what a gradient is, but if you wish to get a better intuition of why it points to the direction of greatest increase of a function, I've found these articles very useful.

http://betterexplained.com/articles/vector-calculus-understanding-the-gradient/
http://betterexplained.com/articles/understanding-pythagorean-distance-and-the-gradient/

For an actual proof, of course, you can proceed as vanhees71 suggested.

Thank you very much! This article explains it very nicely.
 
Thread 'Need help understanding this figure on energy levels'
This figure is from "Introduction to Quantum Mechanics" by Griffiths (3rd edition). It is available to download. It is from page 142. I am hoping the usual people on this site will give me a hand understanding what is going on in the figure. After the equation (4.50) it says "It is customary to introduce the principal quantum number, ##n##, which simply orders the allowed energies, starting with 1 for the ground state. (see the figure)" I still don't understand the figure :( Here is...
Thread 'Understanding how to "tack on" the time wiggle factor'
The last problem I posted on QM made it into advanced homework help, that is why I am putting it here. I am sorry for any hassle imposed on the moderators by myself. Part (a) is quite easy. We get $$\sigma_1 = 2\lambda, \mathbf{v}_1 = \begin{pmatrix} 0 \\ 0 \\ 1 \end{pmatrix} \sigma_2 = \lambda, \mathbf{v}_2 = \begin{pmatrix} 1/\sqrt{2} \\ 1/\sqrt{2} \\ 0 \end{pmatrix} \sigma_3 = -\lambda, \mathbf{v}_3 = \begin{pmatrix} 1/\sqrt{2} \\ -1/\sqrt{2} \\ 0 \end{pmatrix} $$ There are two ways...
Back
Top