1. Limited time only! Sign up for a free 30min personal tutor trial with Chegg Tutors
    Dismiss Notice
Dismiss Notice
Join Physics Forums Today!
The friendliest, high quality science and math community on the planet! Everyone who loves science is here!

Why are these 2 derivatives not treated the same?

  1. Nov 18, 2011 #1
    In equation (5.35) the constant drops out when the derivative with respect to r is taken. However, in equation (5.36) the constant does not drop out. Does anybody know why?

    Equation (5.35)
    [tex]
    F_L=-\frac {d}{dr}\left(\frac {n^2h^2}{2\mu r^2}\right)=\frac{n^2h^2}{\mu r^3}
    [/tex]


    Equation (5.36)
    [tex]
    F_C=-\frac{d}{dr}\left(-\frac {e^2 }{4\pi \epsilon_0 r}\right)=-\frac{e^2}{4\pi \epsilon_0 r^2}
    [/tex]



    The equation can be found in context at the following link, which should take you to page 173, equation (5.35) & (5.36) is found on page 172.

    http://books.google.com/books?id=FnQ...page&q&f=false [Broken]

    Stochastic Simulations of Clusters: Quantum Methods in Flat and Curved Spaces By Emanuele Curotto
     
    Last edited by a moderator: May 5, 2017
  2. jcsd
  3. Nov 18, 2011 #2
    Do you see why

    [tex] \frac {d}{dr} ( \frac {1} {r^2} ) = - \frac {2} {r^3} [/tex]

    and

    [tex] \frac {d}{dr} ( \frac {1} {r} ) = - \frac {1} {r^2} [/tex]
     
  4. Nov 18, 2011 #3
    Wow, it has been a long time since I have performed a derivative.

    Yep, I think I understand.
    Does any constant goes to 1. Then what ever power r is raised to becomes a constant and then the r is raised to the next higher (lower) power.

    Is this example correct?
    [tex]
    \frac {d}{dr} ( \frac {1} {5r^\left(-4\right)} ) = - \frac {1} {\left(1\right)4r^\left(-5\right)}
    [/tex]


    Athough in your example the r^2 in the denoninator put a 2 constant in the numberator. This I don't understand.
    [tex]
    \frac {d}{dr} ( \frac {1} {r^2} ) = - \frac {2} {r^3}
    [/tex]


    Although in the book this equation
    [tex]
    F_C=-\frac{d}{dr}\left(-\frac {e^2 }{4\pi \epsilon_0 r}\right)=-\frac{e^2}{4\pi \epsilon_0 r^2}
    [/tex]

    should be:


    [tex]
    F_C=-\frac{d}{dr}\left(-\frac {e^2 }{4\pi \epsilon_0 r}\right)=-\frac{e^2}{\left(1\right)\pi \epsilon_0 r^2}
    [/tex]
     
  5. Nov 18, 2011 #4
    i'm going to use quick reply instead of taking the time to tex it.

    this may help: look at the 1/r as being r^-1 instead. when you take the derivative of something simple like that, you take the exponent (-1) and multiply that to the front then subtract one on the exponent so (-1) becomes (-2).

    so d/dr of r^(-1) is -(1)r^(-2) aka -1/r^2

    now for the stuff above:

    just take all that negative e squared over 4 pi epsilon-0 out since they aren't being acted upon with calculus ... and you have all that times the derivative of 1/r ... and we know from above that the derivative of 1/r is -1/r^2 ... so when you take the negative of that (where Fc wrote -d/dr) you'll have positive 1/r^2 still multiplied by all the junk in front ... yielding what the book has.

    hope that helps ... go E&M ... and calculus!
     
  6. Nov 21, 2011 #5
    Thanks bpatrick, your tip to factor out the unaffected variables will be quite useful.
    I checked some other references also and everything is starting to come back and clear up; however, I have one persistent question about equation (5.36)
    Equation (5.36)

    [tex]
    F_C=-\frac{d}{dr}\left(-\frac {e^2 }{4\pi \epsilon_0 r}\right)=-\frac{e^2}{4\pi \epsilon_0 r^2}
    [/tex]

    I understand when evaluating the derivative all constants go to 1 thus the 4 in the denominator went to 1. So, what I don’t understand is where the new 4 came from in the denominator as shown in the book. Anyway, here is what I get.

    [tex]
    F_c = (-1) (-\frac{(e^2)}{(\pi \epsilon_0)})
    \frac{d}{dr} (\frac{1}{4r})
    = (-1) (-\frac {e^2 }{\pi \epsilon_0 }) (\frac{ 1}{ (1) (r^2)})
    = (\frac {e^2 }{\pi \epsilon_0 }) (\frac{1}{r^2})
    [/tex]

    So where did the 4 come from AND why did the sign change?
     
  7. Nov 21, 2011 #6
    You can factor out all constants too (done in original tex). In your case, 1/4.

    Fc = (-1)[-e2/(4πε0)] d/dr (1/r)

    The sign should have changed because you can factor a negative one from (-1)[-e2/(4πε0)] = (-1)(-1)[e2/(4πε0)] = [e2/(4πε0)]
     
  8. Nov 21, 2011 #7
    Did not know about factoring out the constants; however, it presents a problem.

    It doesn’t seem right that the derivative can have 2 solutions.
    This:
    [tex]
    F_C=-\left(-\frac {e^2 }{4\pi \epsilon_0 }\right) \frac{d}{dr} \frac{-1}{r}
    =-\frac{e^2}{4\pi \epsilon_0 r^2}
    [/tex]

    Or this:
    [tex]
    F_C=- \left(-\frac{e^2}{\pi \epsilon_0 } \right) \frac{d}{dr} \frac{-1}{4r} =-\frac{e^2}{\pi \epsilon_0 r^2}
    [/tex]
     
  9. Nov 22, 2011 #8
    What?! [tex]\frac{d}{dr}[-r^{-1}]=r^{-2}[/tex]
    And [tex]\frac{d}{dr}[-\frac{1}{4}r^{-1}]=\frac{1}{4}r^{-2}[/tex]
    You leave the coefficients alone when you differentiate or integrate.
     
Know someone interested in this topic? Share this thread via Reddit, Google+, Twitter, or Facebook




Similar Discussions: Why are these 2 derivatives not treated the same?
  1. Derivative of 2^x (Replies: 4)

Loading...