- #1
jeff1evesque
- 312
- 0
Statement:
The definition of the Divergence is given by the following,
[tex]\nabla \cdot \vec{V} \equiv lim_{\Delta v \rightarrow 0}(\frac{\int \int _{surface}\vec{V} \cdot \vec{ds}}{\Delta v}),[/tex]
where [tex]v[/tex] is the unit volume.Relevant questions:
The expression [tex]\vec{V} \cdot \vec{ds}[/tex] on the right side corresponds to the amount of the vector field [tex]V[/tex] diverging in the normal direction of the surface ([tex]\vec{ds}[/tex]). If [tex]V[/tex] is perpendicular in the direction of [tex]\vec{ds}[/tex], then for the particular surface element of the entire surface, the divergence will have a value zero associated with it. Could someone tell me if my understanding is correct? Also, what if [tex]V[/tex], and [tex]\vec{ds}[/tex] are not perpendicular, nor parallel with one another (but in-between). How would the definition define that (if my question, makes any sense)?Thanks,Jeffrey
The definition of the Divergence is given by the following,
[tex]\nabla \cdot \vec{V} \equiv lim_{\Delta v \rightarrow 0}(\frac{\int \int _{surface}\vec{V} \cdot \vec{ds}}{\Delta v}),[/tex]
where [tex]v[/tex] is the unit volume.Relevant questions:
The expression [tex]\vec{V} \cdot \vec{ds}[/tex] on the right side corresponds to the amount of the vector field [tex]V[/tex] diverging in the normal direction of the surface ([tex]\vec{ds}[/tex]). If [tex]V[/tex] is perpendicular in the direction of [tex]\vec{ds}[/tex], then for the particular surface element of the entire surface, the divergence will have a value zero associated with it. Could someone tell me if my understanding is correct? Also, what if [tex]V[/tex], and [tex]\vec{ds}[/tex] are not perpendicular, nor parallel with one another (but in-between). How would the definition define that (if my question, makes any sense)?Thanks,Jeffrey
Last edited: