Divergence formula derivation ?

In summary, the conversation discusses using Gauß's Integral Theorem to determine the divergence in curvilinear orthonormal coordinates. The method involves using the coordinate-independent definition of the divergence and taking into account the surface-normal vectors of an infinitesimal cuboid spanned by the coordinate lines. The conversation also explains the definition of the unit-basis vectors and discusses the direction and orientation of these vectors. The conversation concludes with a request for additional resources or explanations for better understanding.
  • #1
Outrageous
374
0

Homework Statement


How to get equation 1 from the thumbnail?
h1 h2 h3 doesn't have to be constant.
The most I can try is equation 2 .
Please guide thanks.

Homework Equations





The Attempt at a Solution

 

Attachments

  • image.jpg
    image.jpg
    39.5 KB · Views: 679
Physics news on Phys.org
  • #2
Use the coordinate-independent definition of the divergence as the limit of an appropriate integral over the surface of an infinitesimal cuboid spanned by the tangent vectors of the coordinate lines at the point in question.
 
  • #3
Is it not just factoring out ##h_1 h_2 h_3##? As a check, multiplying out (1) gives (2).

Hmm, clearly it's not that simple.
 
  • #4
It's not that simple, because the curvilinear basis vectors are position dependent! Rather use the definition of the divergence,
[tex]\vec{\nabla} \cdot \vec{a}(\vec{x})=\lim_{\mathrm{d} V \rightarrow \{ \vec{x} \}} \frac{1}{\mathrm{d} V} \int_{\partial V} \mathrm{d}^2 \vec{F} \cdot \vec{a}.[/tex]
Hint: Prove first that [itex]\mathrm{d}V=h_1 h_2 h_3 \mathrm{d}^3 u[/itex].
 
  • Like
Likes 1 person
  • #5
This is what I found from a book, not really understand how the methods mean,
1) why the negative of the first equation be ignored?
2) keeping u1 constant, then why second equation come out?

Thanks
 

Attachments

  • image.jpg
    image.jpg
    29 KB · Views: 445
  • #6
Sorry. The first and second equations are in this page.
 

Attachments

  • image.jpg
    image.jpg
    48 KB · Views: 447
  • #7
The idea is to use Gauß's Integral Theorem to an infinitesimal box spanned by the coordinate lines of your orthogonal curvilinear coordinates. It's a little cuboid with 6 surfaces giving the boundary of the volume, and you have to approximately evaluate the surface integral.

To that end we must remember the definition of the basis vectors. Let [itex](q_1,q_2,q_3)[/itex] be the coordinates and [itex]\vec{r}(q_1,q_2,q_3)[/itex] the position vector as functions of them. Then the unit-basis vectors are defined by
[tex]\hat{e}_j=\frac{1}{h_j} \frac{\partial \vec{r}}{\partial q_j}.[/tex]
Since the coordinates are assumed to be orthogonal this means that [itex]\hat{e}_j \cdot \hat{e}_k = \delta_{jk}[/itex]. Also we assume that the order of the coordinates are chosen such that the [itex]\hat{e}_j[/itex] build a postively oriented basis, i.e., [itex]\hat{e}_1 \times \hat{e}_2=\hat{e}_3[/itex].

Now the surface-normal vectors of your cuboid are easily determined. Take the surface parallel to the [itex]q_2 q_3[/itex]-plane at [itex]q_1+\mathrm{d} q_1[/itex]. The surface-normal vector is
[tex]\mathrm{d} \vec{F}=\mathrm{d} q_2 \mathrm{d} q_3 \left . \left (\frac{\partial \vec{r}}{\partial q_2} \times \frac{\partial \vec{r}}{\partial q_3} \right ) \right |_{q_1+\mathrm{d} q_1,q_2,q_3} = \mathrm{d} q_2 \mathrm{d} q_3 (h_2 h_3 \hat{e}_2 \times \hat{e}_3) = \mathrm{d} q_2 \mathrm{d} q_3 (h_2 h_3 \hat{e}_1)_{q_1+\mathrm{d} q_1,q_2,q_3}.[/tex]
The corresponding contribution to the surface integral thus reads
[tex]\mathrm{d} q_2 \mathrm{d} q_3 (h_2 h_3 a_1)|_{q_1+\mathrm{d} q_1,q_2,q_3} = \mathrm{d} q_2 \mathrm{d} q_3 \left [(h_2 h_3 a_1)|_{q_1,q_2,q_3} + \mathrm{d} q_1 \left . \left ( \frac{\partial(h_2 h_3 a_1)}{\partial q_1} \right ) \right |_{q_1,q_2,q_3} + \mathcal{O}(\mathrm{d} q_1^2) \right ].[/tex]
The contribution of the cuboid's edge parallel to the [itex]q_2 q_3[/itex] plane at [itex](q_1,q_2,q_3)[/itex] gives in the same way
[tex]-\mathrm{d} q_2 \mathrm{d} q_3 (h_2 h_3 a_1)|_{q_1,q_2,q_3}[/tex]
Thus taking these two contributions together you get
[tex]\mathrm{d}q_1 \mathrm{d} q_2 \mathrm{d} q_3 \left (\frac{\partial(h_2 h_3 a_1)}{\partial q_1} \right )+\mathcal{O}(\mathrm{d} q_1^2 \mathrm{d} q_2 \mathrm{d} q_3).[/tex]
Now the volume of the cuboid is [itex]\mathrm{d} q_1 \mathrm{d} q_2 \mathrm{d} q_3 h_1 h_2 h_3[/itex].
Dividing the above calculated contribution to the surface integral by this and letting the [itex]\mathrm{d} q_j \rightarrow 0[/itex] gives the following contribution to the divergence:
[tex]\vec{\nabla} \cdot \vec{a}=\frac{1}{h_1 h_2 h_3} \frac{\partial(h_2 h_3 a_1)}{\partial q_1} + \text{contributions from other surface elements}.[/tex]
Now you can think about the other surface elements. You'll see that this gives a proof for the correct form of the divergence in curvilinear orthonormal coordinates and also a very intuitive picture of why this must be the correct formula :-).
 
  • #8
vanhees71 said:
The idea is to use Gauß's Integral Theorem to an infinitesimal box spanned by the coordinate lines of your orthogonal curvilinear coordinates. It's a little cuboid with 6 surfaces giving the boundary of the volume, and you have to approximately evaluate the surface integral.

To that end we must remember the definition of the basis vectors. Let [itex](q_1,q_2,q_3)[/itex] be the coordinates and [itex]\vec{r}(q_1,q_2,q_3)[/itex] the position vector as functions of them. Then the unit-basis vectors are defined by
[tex]\hat{e}_j=\frac{1}{h_j} \frac{\partial \vec{r}}{\partial q_j}.[/tex]
Since the coordinates are assumed to be orthogonal this means that [itex]\hat{e}_j \cdot \hat{e}_k = \delta_{jk}[/itex]. Also we assume that the order of the coordinates are chosen such that the [itex]\hat{e}_j[/itex] build a postively oriented basis, i.e., [itex]\hat{e}_1 \times \hat{e}_2=\hat{e}_3[/itex].
This is to Define the coordinate on curvilinear basis, and the direction of [itex]\hat{e}_j[/itex] .
For orthogonal, [itex]\hat{e}_j \cdot \hat{e}_k = \delta_{jk}[/itex]? Is not zero?

vanhees71 said:
Now the surface-normal vectors of your cuboid are easily determined. Take the surface parallel to the [itex]q_2 q_3[/itex]-plane at [itex]q_1+\mathrm{d} q_1[/itex]. The surface-normal vector is
[tex]\mathrm{d} \vec{F}=\mathrm{d} q_2 \mathrm{d} q_3 \left . \left (\frac{\partial \vec{r}}{\partial q_2} \times \frac{\partial \vec{r}}{\partial q_3} \right ) \right |_{q_1+\mathrm{d} q_1,q_2,q_3} = \mathrm{d} q_2 \mathrm{d} q_3 (h_2 h_3 \hat{e}_2 \times \hat{e}_3) = \mathrm{d} q_2 \mathrm{d} q_3 (h_2 h_3 \hat{e}_1)_{q_1+\mathrm{d} q_1,q_2,q_3}.[/tex]
The corresponding contribution to the surface integral thus reads
[tex]\mathrm{d} q_2 \mathrm{d} q_3 (h_2 h_3 a_1)|_{q_1+\mathrm{d} q_1,q_2,q_3} = \mathrm{d} q_2 \mathrm{d} q_3 \left [(h_2 h_3 a_1)|_{q_1,q_2,q_3} + \mathrm{d} q_1 \left . \left ( \frac{\partial(h_2 h_3 a_1)}{\partial q_1} \right ) \right |_{q_1,q_2,q_3} + \mathcal{O}(\mathrm{d} q_1^2) \right ].[/tex]
The surface-normal vector dF is the value of surface area with direction pointing to the direction ei. ?
Why there are dq1 and dq2?
Thanks for answering. My mathematics is not very good, do you have any link for answer or any book?
 
  • #9
The Kronecker-[itex]\delta[/itex] symbol is defined as
[tex]\delta_{jk}=\begin{cases} 1 & \text{for} \quad j=k,\\
0 & \text{for} \quad j \neq k.
\end{cases}[/tex]
The area element in question is spanned by the coordinate lines, and thus the surface-normal vector is given by
[tex]\mathrm{d} \vec{F}=\frac{\partial \vec{r}}{\partial q_2} \mathrm{d} q_2 \times \frac{\partial \vec{r}}{\partial q_3} \mathrm{d} q_3.[/tex]
It's magnitude is the area of the surface, and it's direction is perpendicular on the surface. In Gauß's Theorem the orientation has to be chosen such that the normal vectors point out of the enclosed volume, over which you integrate:
[tex]\int_{V} \mathrm{d}^3 \vec{r} \vec{\nabla} \cdot \vec{a}=\int_{\partial V} \mathrm{d}^2 \vec{F} \cdot \vec{a}.[/tex]
 
  • #10
vanhees71 said:
[itex]q_2 q_3[/itex]-plane at [itex]q_1+\mathrm{d} q_1[/itex]. The surface-normal vector is
[tex]\mathrm{d} \vec{F}=\mathrm{d} q_2 \mathrm{d} q_3 \left . \left (\frac{\partial \vec{r}}{\partial q_2} \times \frac{\partial \vec{r}}{\partial q_3} \right ) \right |_{q_1+\mathrm{d} q_1,q_2,q_3} = \mathrm{d} q_2 \mathrm{d} q_3 (h_2 h_3 \hat{e}_2 \times \hat{e}_3) [/tex]

Should it be like this? dF is the change of the surface area.
[tex]\mathrm{d} \vec{F}=\mathrm{d} q_2 \mathrm{d} q_3 \left . \left (\frac{\partial \vec{r}}{\partial q_2} \times \frac{\partial \vec{r}}{\partial q_3} \right ) \right |_{\mathrm{d} q_1,q_2,q_3} [/tex]
 
Last edited:

FAQ: Divergence formula derivation ?

What is the divergence formula?

The divergence formula is a mathematical expression used to calculate the tendency of a vector field to either converge or diverge at a specific point. It is represented by the symbol ∇ · F, where ∇ is the del operator and F is the vector field.

Why is the divergence formula important?

The divergence formula is important because it helps us to understand the behavior of vector fields in both 2D and 3D space. It is used in various fields such as fluid dynamics, electromagnetism, and quantum mechanics to analyze the flow of fluids, electric and magnetic fields, and the behavior of particles.

How is the divergence formula derived?

The divergence formula is derived from the fundamental theorem of calculus, which states that the integral of a function over a closed surface is equal to the integral of its derivative over the volume enclosed by that surface. By applying this theorem to a vector field, we can derive the divergence formula.

What are the applications of the divergence formula?

The divergence formula has various applications in physics and engineering. It is used to calculate the flux of a vector field across a surface, which is essential in fluid dynamics and electromagnetism. It is also used to solve differential equations and to analyze the behavior of particles in quantum mechanics.

Are there any limitations to the divergence formula?

Yes, there are some limitations to the divergence formula. It can only be applied to continuous vector fields, and it does not work for vector fields that are not defined everywhere. It also does not take into account the direction of the vector field, only its magnitude. Additionally, it is not valid for non-Euclidean spaces.

Similar threads

Back
Top