What is the Potential of a Given Function Independent of Path?

Click For Summary

Homework Help Overview

The discussion revolves around determining the potential of a vector function F = [2x(y^3 - z^3), 3x^2y^2, -3x^2z^2], which is stated to be independent of path. The original poster is attempting to find a scalar function f such that the vector field is conservative.

Discussion Character

  • Exploratory, Mathematical reasoning, Assumption checking

Approaches and Questions Raised

  • The original poster attempts to derive the potential function by integrating the components of F and expresses confusion over discrepancies in their results. Some participants question specific steps in the differentiation process and suggest revisiting the calculations.

Discussion Status

The discussion is ongoing, with participants providing feedback on the original poster's attempts. There is an exchange of ideas regarding the correctness of the differentiation steps, and some participants are exploring the implications of their findings without reaching a consensus.

Contextual Notes

Participants are working under the assumption that the vector field is conservative, which influences their approach to finding the potential function. There are indications of difficulties with mathematical notation and clarity in communication.

SlideMan
Messages
41
Reaction score
0

Homework Statement



I need to determine the potential of the following function:

F = [2x(y^3 - z^3), 3x^2y^2, -3x^2z^2]

The equation is given to be independent of path, and F \cdot dr = 0

The Attempt at a Solution



\frac{\partial f}{\partial x} = 2xy^3 - 2xz^3 \Rightarrow f(x,y,z) = x^2y^3 - x^2z^3 + g(y,z)

\frac{\partial f}{\partial y} = 3x^2y^2 = 3x^2y^2 + \frac{\partial g}{\partial y} \Rightarrow g(y,z) = h(z)

\frac{\partial f}{\partial z} = -3x^2z^2 = \frac{\partial h}{\partial z} \Rightarrow h(z) = -x^2z^3

So, f(x,y,z) = x^2y^3 - 2x^2z^3

This answer doesn't check out. Taking the partial of f with respect to x, y, and z does not yield the initial equation. What am I missing? Is there a better way to go about this?

The correct answer turns out to be x^2y^3 - x^2z^3, which is my initial equation for f without h(z).

Thanks!
 
Last edited:
Physics news on Phys.org
SlideMan said:
1.

\frac{\partial f}{\partial z} = -3x^2z^2 = \frac{\partial h}{\partial z} \Rightarrow h(z) = -x^2z^3


I think you got this line wrong
 
^ OK...what am I missing?

Working backwards...

\frac{\partial}{\partial z}(-x^2z^3) = -3x^2z^2
 
\frac{\partial f}{\partial z} = -3x^2z^2 = -3x^2z^2 + \frac{\partial h}{\partial z} \Rightarrow h(z) = 0

Im having trouble with latex, but your partial f over partial z which is -3x^2z^2 = -3x^2z^2 + partial h over partial z. so, h(z) = 0=g(y,x)
 
Last edited:
^ Ahh...got it. I really shouldn't be doing this so late at night. :) Thanks!
 

Similar threads

Replies
2
Views
2K
  • · Replies 8 ·
Replies
8
Views
2K
  • · Replies 6 ·
Replies
6
Views
2K
Replies
6
Views
2K
  • · Replies 26 ·
Replies
26
Views
3K
  • · Replies 3 ·
Replies
3
Views
1K
Replies
1
Views
1K
  • · Replies 18 ·
Replies
18
Views
3K
  • · Replies 2 ·
Replies
2
Views
2K
Replies
2
Views
1K