Why is the Gradient of Displacement Vector Parallel to \( \vec{r} - \vec{r'} \)?

Click For Summary

Discussion Overview

The discussion revolves around the mathematical concept of taking the gradient of a displacement vector defined as the magnitude of the difference between two position vectors, \( \vec{r} \) and \( \vec{r'} \). Participants explore the implications of the gradient's direction in relation to these vectors, focusing on the conditions under which the gradient is parallel to \( \vec{r} - \vec{r'} \) rather than \( \vec{r} \) itself.

Discussion Character

  • Technical explanation, Conceptual clarification, Debate/contested

Main Points Raised

  • One participant questions why the gradient of the displacement vector is said to be parallel to \( \vec{r} - \vec{r'} \) instead of \( \vec{r} \), suggesting that the gradient should point in the direction of the variable with respect to which the derivative is taken.
  • Another participant challenges this reasoning, advocating for a mathematical approach and suggesting that a translation argument could clarify the situation.
  • A third participant recommends expressing the equation in Cartesian coordinates to facilitate understanding.
  • Another participant provides an intuitive argument, stating that the gradient indicates the direction of maximum change in a scalar function, which is influenced by the position of \( \vec{r'} \) and introduces angular dependencies that cannot be ignored.

Areas of Agreement / Disagreement

Participants express differing views on the relationship between the gradient and the vectors involved, with no consensus reached on the correct interpretation of the gradient's direction.

Contextual Notes

Some assumptions regarding the relationship between the vectors and the nature of the gradient may be implicit, and the discussion includes unresolved mathematical steps and dependencies on angular relationships.

TheCanadian
Messages
361
Reaction score
13
I have a quantity defined as ## r =
\left|\vec{r} - \vec{r'}
\right|
## and am trying to take the gradient of this quantity. Now the gradient is with respect to the ordinary vector, ## \vec{r}##, and not ## \vec{r'} ##. But after looking at a solution, it says the direction of the gradient is in the direction parallel to ## \vec{r} - \vec{r'} ## and not ## \vec{r} ##. My apologies for being a bit vague here, but shouldn't the direction of the gradient be pointing in the direction in which the derivative is being taken (assuming only a radial component exists)? So if I am taking the derivative with respect to ## r ##, then it points in a direction parallel to ## \vec{r}##, while a derivative wrt to ##r - r' ## would point in ## \vec{r} - \vec{r'} ##?
 
Physics news on Phys.org
No, you are wrong. I suggest actually doing the math rather than trying to reason your way forward.

If you definitely want to reason, you should use a translation argument from the gradient of the distance from the origin.
 
you should write out the equation in Cartesian coordinate
 
If you want to see why direction of the gradient does not have to be in the direction in which derivative is taken, here is an intuitive argument:
Gradient of a scalar function means that the direction in which the function changes most. So when you change r infinitesimally the change in the magnitude of the displacement vector cannot be independent of the direction of the r' because it affects the displacement vector.
Also, if you write it mathematically you will encounter a term like rr'cosa where a is the angle between r and r'. So you cannot assume there is no angular dependency.
 
Last edited:

Similar threads

Replies
3
Views
4K
  • · Replies 8 ·
Replies
8
Views
2K
  • · Replies 3 ·
Replies
3
Views
2K
  • · Replies 10 ·
Replies
10
Views
2K
  • · Replies 3 ·
Replies
3
Views
1K
  • · Replies 1 ·
Replies
1
Views
2K
  • · Replies 1 ·
Replies
1
Views
3K
  • · Replies 1 ·
Replies
1
Views
1K
Replies
3
Views
3K
  • · Replies 0 ·
Replies
0
Views
1K