This comes up in the context of a homework assignment. We're given the Euler equations for invisicid fluid flow. The variables at play:
- $p=p(x,y,z,t)$ is pressure
- $\rho = \rho(x,y,z,t)$ is mass density
- $\vec v = \vec v(x,y,z,t)$ is velocity of the fluid
- $\vec f$ is external force per volume
Then we're given that the Euler equations are:
$$\frac{\partial \rho}{\partial t} + \nabla \cdot (\rho \vec v) = 0 \qquad \frac{\partial \rho \vec v}{\partial t} + \vec v \cdot \nabla (\rho \vec v) = \vec f - \nabla p$$
for continuity and momentum, respectively.
My concerns lie with the order of operations dot products and the $\nabla$ operator, and in turn the consistency of the dimensions of these equations. (Which might sound a bit silly, but my physics knowledge isn't the best.)
More explicitly, consider the expression $\vec x \cdot \nabla \vec y$ as in the question title. Which order of operations would be correct: finding $\nabla \vec y$ and then taking the dot product, or taking the adjunction $\vec x \cdot \nabla$ and multiplying that by $\vec y$? Or, symbolically, which does the title mean:
$$\vec x \cdot \Big( \nabla \vec y \Big) \qquad \text{or} \qquad \Big( \vec x \cdot \nabla \Big) \vec y$$
The reason this is a concern lies with the momentum equation given earlier. $\partial_t (\rho \vec v)$ should be a vector, and the right-hand side is the difference of vectors. However, my intuition suggests that of the two above conventions, we should be using the left one, which would render $\vec v \cdot \nabla (\rho \vec v)$ a scalar, which doesn't make sense.
So I was wondering if it happens to instead be $(\vec v \cdot \nabla) (\rho \vec v)$, which, to my understanding, would indeed be a vector. Or is there something else I'm missing?