Where does this equation for stationary points come from?

Click For Summary
SUMMARY

The discussion centers on the derivation of the equation for stationary points as presented in "The Theoretical Minimum" by Leonard Susskind. The equation describes how a small change in a function A, dependent on variables x1, ..., xn, can be expressed through its total derivative, represented as ∇A. The key equation is A(𝑥 + Δ𝑥) - A(𝑥) = ∇A · Δ𝑥 + O(∥Δ𝑥∥²), where the inner product is defined, and the term O(∥Δ𝑥∥²) represents higher-order terms that can be neglected for infinitesimally small changes.

PREREQUISITES
  • Understanding of calculus, specifically total derivatives and partial derivatives.
  • Familiarity with vector notation and inner products.
  • Knowledge of Taylor series expansions and their applications in physics.
  • Basic concepts of classical mechanics as outlined in "The Theoretical Minimum".
NEXT STEPS
  • Study the concept of total derivatives in multivariable calculus.
  • Learn about Taylor series and their role in approximating functions.
  • Explore the implications of neglecting higher-order terms in physical equations.
  • Review classical mechanics principles as discussed in "The Theoretical Minimum".
USEFUL FOR

Students of physics, mathematicians, and anyone interested in the foundational concepts of calculus and classical mechanics, particularly those studying the implications of small changes in functions.

Alexander350
Messages
36
Reaction score
1
In the Classical Mechanics volume of The Theoretical Minimum, he writes a shorthand equation for a small change in a function. Please could someone explain exactly what it means and where it comes from?
15039480595731229362978.jpg
 
Physics news on Phys.org
If you want to have it explained
Alexander350 said:
exactly
then it requires a bit of calculus.

Namely, it is a theorem that if ##A## is a function depending on variables ##x_1,\ldots,x_n## and all partial derivatives ##\frac{\partial A}{\partial x_i}## exist as continuous functions, then the total derivative of ##A## is given by ##\nabla A = (\frac{\partial A}{\partial x_1},\ldots,\frac{\partial A}{\partial x_n})##. This implies that the change
$$
A(\mathbf{x} + \Delta{\mathbf{x}}) - A(\mathbf{x}) = \nabla{A} \cdot \Delta{\mathbf{x}} + O(\|\Delta{x}\|^2) \qquad (\ast)
$$
where ##\cdot## denotes the inner product, so
$$
\nabla{A} \cdot \Delta{\mathbf{x}} = \sum_i{\frac{\partial A}{\partial x_i}\Delta x_i}
$$
and ##O(\|\Delta{x}\|^2)## are terms of at least quadratic order. I believe that physicists then argue that as ##\|\Delta{x}\|## becomes "infinitesimally small", these quadratic terms can be neglected and what is left in ##(\ast)## is denoted ##\delta A##.
 
Last edited:
  • Like
Likes   Reactions: Alexander350 and dextercioby

Similar threads

  • · Replies 5 ·
Replies
5
Views
2K
  • · Replies 1 ·
Replies
1
Views
2K
  • · Replies 6 ·
Replies
6
Views
3K
  • · Replies 48 ·
2
Replies
48
Views
5K
  • · Replies 16 ·
Replies
16
Views
3K
  • · Replies 1 ·
Replies
1
Views
1K
  • · Replies 22 ·
Replies
22
Views
4K
  • · Replies 10 ·
Replies
10
Views
2K
  • · Replies 2 ·
Replies
2
Views
2K
  • · Replies 16 ·
Replies
16
Views
2K