Why Does d/dx Not Equal d/dx' Even When x Equals x'?

In summary, the conversation is discussing an exercise in "Intro to Smooth Manifolds" where the goal is to show that in a coordinate transformation, the partial derivative operator does not equal the partial derivative operator in the original coordinates. The confusion arises from the use of index notation and the difference in which index is being summed over. This is known as "Woodhouse's Second Fundamental Confusion of Calculus". The correct application of the chain rule is demonstrated in the exercise.
  • #1
bigbalpha
4
0
Summary: I'm stuck on this simple excersize, to show that in this coord transform, despite x = x', d/dx != d/dx'

From "Intro to Smooth Manifolds" (this is a calculus excersize), The Problem I have is with showing d/dx != d/dx'
246034


When I write out the Jacobian matrix, I get exactly d/dx = d/dx' and not sure what I'm doing wrong, here is my work:
246035

[Moderator's note: Moved from a technical forum and thus no template.]
 
Last edited by a moderator:
Physics news on Phys.org
  • #2
You have the transpose of the Jacobian in place of the Jacobian.
 
  • #3
Alright, always get index notation very confused, for example, earlier in the book, it says this. This is contradictory?
246054
 
  • #4
That notation looks very confused so I would not say it is strange that you are confused. Just from the image I am not sure what the author intends.

Anyway, your problem does not really need the Jacobian - just the chain rule for partial derivatives.
 
  • #5
Orodruin said:
That notation looks very confused so I would not say it is strange that you are confused. Just from the image I am not sure what the author intends.

Which image, the one in post #1, or the one in post #3 ? And in what way is the author's intention unclear?
 
  • #6
Post #3. By unclear I mean that it is not clear to me what the different quantities represent. It would be good to have the author’s definitions. If you have a better feeling for the notation, please feel free to answer the OP.
 
  • #7
bigbalpha said:
Alright, always get index notation very confused, for example, earlier in the book, it says this. This is contradictory?
View attachment 246054

Matrix multiplication in terms of suffix notation is written [itex]a_i = M_{ij}b_j[/itex]: the second index of the matrix is summed over. The first index labels the rows, and the second the columns. (This assumes we regard vectors as column vectors.)

What (3.9) is saying is that [itex]\frac{\partial F^j}{\partial x^i}(p)[/itex] is the [itex]j[/itex]th component of the image of the [itex]i[/itex]th basis vector. Thus if you have a tangent vector [itex]X^i \left.\frac{\partial}{\partial x^i}\right|_p[/itex], then [itex]dF_p[/itex] will send it to [itex]Y^j \left.\frac{\partial}{\partial y^j}\right|_{F(p)}[/itex] where [tex]
Y^j = \frac{\partial F^j}{\partial x^i}(p) X^i.[/tex] Note that the index [itex]i[/itex] is being summed over, so must be the second index (labelling columns) and [itex]j[/itex] is the first index (labelling rows). This is of course the opposite of the standard convention, but consistent with the matrix following (3.9).

On the other hand, one naturally writes the chain rule, and thus the jacobian, as [tex]
\frac{\partial}{\partial x'^i} = \frac{\partial x^j}{\partial x'^i} \frac{\partial}{\partial x^j}.[/tex] Here, in accordance with the usual convention, the first index (labelling rows) is [itex]i[/itex] and the second index (labelling columns) is [itex]j[/itex]. Also, in this instance the partial derivative operators are the components, not the basis vectors.

TLDR: Pay attention to which index is being summed over. This index will label the columns.
 
  • Like
Likes bigbalpha
  • #8
Getting back to the concrete exercise in the original post, @bigbalpha has, after matrix multiplication,
$$\begin{bmatrix} \frac{\partial}{\partial x} \\
\frac{\partial}{\partial y} \end{bmatrix}
=
\begin{bmatrix} \frac{\partial \tilde{x}}{\partial x} & \frac{\partial \tilde{x}}{\partial y} \\
\frac{\partial \tilde{y}}{\partial x} & \frac{\partial \tilde{y}}{\partial y} \end{bmatrix}
\begin{bmatrix} \frac{\partial}{\partial \tilde{x}} \\
\frac{\partial}{\partial \tilde{y}} \end{bmatrix}
=
\begin{bmatrix} \frac{\partial \tilde{x}}{\partial x} \frac{\partial}{\partial \tilde{x}} + \frac{\partial \tilde{x}}{\partial y} \frac{\partial}{\partial \tilde{y}} \\
\frac{\partial \tilde{y}}{\partial x} \frac{\partial}{\partial \tilde{x}} + \frac{\partial \tilde{y}}{\partial y} \frac{\partial}{\partial \tilde{y}} \end{bmatrix} .
$$

This gives, for example,
$$\frac{\partial}{\partial x} = \frac{\partial \tilde{x}}{\partial x} \frac{\partial}{\partial \tilde{x}} + \frac{\partial \tilde{x}}{\partial y} \frac{\partial}{\partial \tilde{y} },$$
which is an incorrect application of the chain rule.

Used correctly, the chain rule gives
$$\frac{\partial}{\partial x} = \frac{\partial \tilde{x}}{\partial x} \frac{\partial}{\partial \tilde{x}} + \frac{\partial \tilde{y}}{\partial x} \frac{\partial}{\partial \tilde{y} }.$$

The exercise is meant to illustrate an error (that I have seen in at least two general relativity books) that is sometimes called "Woodhouse's Second Fundamental Confusion of Calculus".
 
  • Like
Likes bigbalpha
  • #9
To see how this (that ##\partial/\partial x \neq \partial/\partial \tilde x## even when ##x = \tilde x##) arises, we need to consider what partial derivatives actually means. A partial derivative is the change in a function when you change only one of its parameters while keeping the other parameters constant. The partial derivative ##\partial f/\partial x## means the change in ##f## with ##x## while keeping ##y## constant whereas ##\partial f/\partial \tilde x## is the change in ##f## with ##\tilde x## while keeping ##\tilde y## constant. In the first case, we would compare the value of ##f(x,y_0)## with the value of ##f(x+\epsilon,y_0)##. Consider now the case ##\tilde x = x## and ##\tilde y = x+y##. The partial derivative ##\partial f/\partial \tilde x## now means comparing ##f(x,\tilde y_0 + x)## with ##f(x + \epsilon,\tilde y_0 + x +\epsilon)##, since we must keep ##\tilde y## constant. This is not the same as when taking the partial derivative with respect to ##x##.
 
  • #10
pasmith said:
Matrix multiplication in terms of suffix notation is written [itex]a_i = M_{ij}b_j[/itex]: the second index of the matrix is summed over. The first index labels the rows, and the second the columns. (This assumes we regard vectors as column vectors.)

What (3.9) is saying is that [itex]\frac{\partial F^j}{\partial x^i}(p)[/itex] is the [itex]j[/itex]th component of the image of the [itex]i[/itex]th basis vector. Thus if you have a tangent vector [itex]X^i \left.\frac{\partial}{\partial x^i}\right|_p[/itex], then [itex]dF_p[/itex] will send it to [itex]Y^j \left.\frac{\partial}{\partial y^j}\right|_{F(p)}[/itex] where [tex]
Y^j = \frac{\partial F^j}{\partial x^i}(p) X^i.[/tex] Note that the index [itex]i[/itex] is being summed over, so must be the second index (labelling columns) and [itex]j[/itex] is the first index (labelling rows). This is of course the opposite of the standard convention, but consistent with the matrix following (3.9).

On the other hand, one naturally writes the chain rule, and thus the jacobian, as [tex]
\frac{\partial}{\partial x'^i} = \frac{\partial x^j}{\partial x'^i} \frac{\partial}{\partial x^j}.[/tex] Here, in accordance with the usual convention, the first index (labelling rows) is [itex]i[/itex] and the second index (labelling columns) is [itex]j[/itex]. Also, in this instance the partial derivative operators are the components, not the basis vectors.

TLDR: Pay attention to which index is being summed over. This index will label the columns.

Thanks a lot for that explanation, that really helped!
 

FAQ: Why Does d/dx Not Equal d/dx' Even When x Equals x'?

What is a coordinate transform?

A coordinate transform is a mathematical process used to convert the coordinates of a point from one coordinate system to another. This is often necessary when working with different coordinate systems, such as converting from Cartesian coordinates to polar coordinates.

How do I perform a coordinate transform?

The specific steps for performing a coordinate transform will depend on the type of coordinate system and the type of transformation needed. In general, it involves using a set of equations or algorithms to convert the coordinates from one system to another. There are also many online tools and software programs available to assist with coordinate transforms.

What are the most common types of coordinate systems?

The most common types of coordinate systems include Cartesian coordinates (x, y), polar coordinates (r, θ), cylindrical coordinates (r, θ, z), and spherical coordinates (r, θ, φ). Each of these systems has its own set of equations for converting coordinates.

Why do I need to use coordinate transforms?

Coordinate transforms are necessary for a variety of reasons, such as working with different coordinate systems in mathematics and physics, converting between units of measurement, and mapping locations on Earth's surface using latitude and longitude coordinates. They are also used in computer graphics and navigation systems.

What are some common mistakes when performing a coordinate transform?

Some common mistakes when performing a coordinate transform include using the wrong equations or algorithms, inputting incorrect values, and forgetting to account for units of measurement. It is important to double-check all inputs and outputs to ensure the accuracy of the transformation.

Similar threads

Back
Top