Difference between revisions of "Nabla"

From Maths
Jump to: navigation, search
m
m
 
Line 1: Line 1:
{{Definition}}
 
 
 
==Definition==
 
==Definition==
 
<math>\nabla(\ )=\mathbf{i}\frac{\partial(\ )}{\partial x}+\mathbf{j}\frac{\partial(\ )}{\partial y}+\mathbf{k}\frac{\partial(\ )}{\partial z}</math>
 
<math>\nabla(\ )=\mathbf{i}\frac{\partial(\ )}{\partial x}+\mathbf{j}\frac{\partial(\ )}{\partial y}+\mathbf{k}\frac{\partial(\ )}{\partial z}</math>
Line 15: Line 13:
  
 
1 book using this doesn't mean that the other books are wrong, it could be on to something. However in practice I have never actually come across the need for this. Which is why I list the first two definitions. I write this to show I have considered alternatives and why I do not use them.
 
1 book using this doesn't mean that the other books are wrong, it could be on to something. However in practice I have never actually come across the need for this. Which is why I list the first two definitions. I write this to show I have considered alternatives and why I do not use them.
 +
 +
{{Definition}}

Latest revision as of 18:35, 13 February 2015

Definition

( )=i( )x+j( )y+k( )z

Laplace operator

( )=2( )=2( )x2+2( )y2+2( )z2

Notes (other forms seen)

I've seen a book (Vector Analysis and Cartesian Tensors - Third Edition - D E Borune & P C Kendall - which is a good book) distinguishbetween the s used.

I will use to denote "bold" , which I usually draw by drawing a triangle, then a line down the left and across the top. I write just as a triangle with a line down the left side. This works well.

I define n( )=in( )xn+jn( )yn+kn( )zn and n( )=n( )xn+n( )yn+n( )zn as a slight extension to this notation.

1 book using this doesn't mean that the other books are wrong, it could be on to something. However in practice I have never actually come across the need for this. Which is why I list the first two definitions. I write this to show I have considered alternatives and why I do not use them.