Difference between revisions of "Nabla"
m |
m |
||
Line 1: | Line 1: | ||
− | |||
− | |||
==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 ∇
I will use →∇
I define →∇n( )=i∂n( )∂xn+j∂n( )∂yn+k∂n( )∂zn
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.