Why is the trace of jacobian=the divergence?

  • Thread starter Thread starter marellasunny
  • Start date Start date
  • Tags Tags
    Divergence Trace
AI Thread Summary
The discussion explores the theoretical connection between the trace of the Jacobian and the divergence of a vector field, emphasizing that the trace represents the sum of the partial derivatives of the vector field components. It establishes that the trace of the Jacobian matrix at a point equals the divergence, which is mathematically expressed as the sum of the derivatives of each component of the vector field. The conversation highlights the importance of invariants like the trace and determinant, which are coordinate-independent and thus provide a consistent representation of the function. Additionally, the participants clarify terminology regarding coordinate independence and the potential confusion arising from coordinate-dependent derivatives. This understanding is crucial for accurately interpreting mathematical relationships in vector calculus.
marellasunny
Messages
245
Reaction score
3
What is the theoretical connection intuitively justifying that the trace of the jacobian=the divergence of a vector field? I know that this also equals the volume flow rate/original volume in the vector field but leaving that aside, what is the mathematical background behind establishing this equality?
 
Mathematics news on Phys.org
Are you asking for a proof? The proof is trivial (it follows immediately from the form of the jacobian). Let ##U\subseteq \mathbb{R}^{n}## be open and let ##F:U\rightarrow \mathbb{R}^{m}## be differentiable at ##a\in U##. Then the matrix representation of the total derivative of ##F## at ##a##, in the standard basis ##S##, is given by ##(DF(a))_{S} = (\frac{\partial F^j}{\partial x^i}(a))##. We call this matrix representation the jacobian of such a map. Hence ##Tr(DF(a))_{S} = \sum\frac{\partial F^{i}}{\partial x^{i}}(a)##. Thus if ##X:U\subseteq \mathbb{R}^{3}\rightarrow \mathbb{R}^{3}## is a vector field and ##a\in U##, ##Tr(DX)_{S}(a) = \frac{\partial X^{1}}{\partial x^1}(a) + \frac{\partial X^{2}}{\partial x^2}(a) + \frac{\partial X^{3}}{\partial x^3}(a) = (\nabla\cdot X)(a)##.
 
Last edited:
Well the Jacobian it the derivative of the function in the f:V->V senses. So any other derivative can be found from it, in particular we like invariants of the Jacobian including the trace and determinant as they are coordinate independent and as such represent the function without interference.
 
lurflurf said:
in particular we like invariants of the Jacobian including the trace and determinant as they are coordinate independent and as such represent the function without interference.

I think you meant "the trace and determinant are independent of the coordinate system".

Could you please explain the meaning of "represent the function without interference"?
 
coordinate independent and independent of the coordinate system mean the same thing, but coordinate independent is shorter and sounds better. By "represent the function without interference" I mean that sometimes one uses coordinate dependent, but when one does she must always consider what is caused by the function and what is caused by the coordinate system. A condition must be considered in terms of the coordinates. A simple example if we define a derivative (x^2f)' the condition f'=0 becomes ((x^2f)'-2xf)/x^2=0 when might cause confusion.
 
Insights auto threads is broken atm, so I'm manually creating these for new Insight articles. In Dirac’s Principles of Quantum Mechanics published in 1930 he introduced a “convenient notation” he referred to as a “delta function” which he treated as a continuum analog to the discrete Kronecker delta. The Kronecker delta is simply the indexed components of the identity operator in matrix algebra Source: https://www.physicsforums.com/insights/what-exactly-is-diracs-delta-function/ by...
Suppose ,instead of the usual x,y coordinate system with an I basis vector along the x -axis and a corresponding j basis vector along the y-axis we instead have a different pair of basis vectors ,call them e and f along their respective axes. I have seen that this is an important subject in maths My question is what physical applications does such a model apply to? I am asking here because I have devoted quite a lot of time in the past to understanding convectors and the dual...
Thread 'Imaginary Pythagoras'
I posted this in the Lame Math thread, but it's got me thinking. Is there any validity to this? Or is it really just a mathematical trick? Naively, I see that i2 + plus 12 does equal zero2. But does this have a meaning? I know one can treat the imaginary number line as just another axis like the reals, but does that mean this does represent a triangle in the complex plane with a hypotenuse of length zero? Ibix offered a rendering of the diagram using what I assume is matrix* notation...

Similar threads

Replies
11
Views
3K
Replies
4
Views
1K
Replies
10
Views
3K
Replies
9
Views
17K
Replies
1
Views
2K
Replies
1
Views
1K
Replies
20
Views
4K
Back
Top