2
$\begingroup$

I'm recently working on material derivatives, defined as follows.

$$\frac{D }{Dt}=\frac{\partial }{\partial t}+v\cdot \nabla $$

It is easy to show that a material(or convective) derivative of an infinitesimal vector can be shown as

$$\frac{D \delta x}{Dt}=\delta x \cdot \nabla v $$

Now, if there is a surface element defined as $\delta S = \delta x \times \delta y $, I have to show that this has the following relationship

$$\frac{D \delta S}{Dt}=(\nabla \cdot v)\delta S-(\nabla v) \cdot \delta S $$

I am trying to solve this by directly using the levi-civita symbol which gives

$$(\frac{D \delta S}{Dt})_{i} = (\frac{D \delta x}{Dt} \times \delta y + \delta x \times \frac{D \delta y}{Dt})_{i} = \varepsilon_{ijk}[(\delta x\cdot \nabla v)_{j} \delta y_{k}+\delta x_{j}(\nabla v \cdot \delta y)_{k}] = \varepsilon_{ijk}[\nabla v_{jl}\delta y_{k}\delta x_{l}+\nabla v_{kl}\delta y_{l}\delta x_{j}]$$

where $\nabla v_{ij} = \frac{\partial v_{j}}{\partial q_{i}}$

I could not go further, so I wrote down the result in the similar form,

$$(\frac{D \delta S}{Dt})_{i}=(\nabla \cdot v)\delta S_{i}-((\nabla v) \cdot \delta S)_{i} = \nabla v_{jj}\delta S_{i}-\nabla v_{ji}\delta S_{j} $$

and this is all I have for now. Could anyone give me a clue to proving the equation above?

$\endgroup$
5
  • $\begingroup$ you are done, nothing else to do $\endgroup$
    – lurscher
    Sep 4 '21 at 3:04
  • $\begingroup$ @lurscher Thanks for your comment! Could you elucidate please? I don't find how the two equations could be the same at this point. $\endgroup$
    – HANEUL
    Sep 4 '21 at 3:07
  • $\begingroup$ the former is in geometric vector notation, the latter is in component vector notation. Both represent the same mathematical object $\endgroup$
    – lurscher
    Sep 4 '21 at 17:41
  • $\begingroup$ To clarify the common type of vector notations typically used in textbooks: en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Vector_notation#Rectangular_vectors $\endgroup$
    – lurscher
    Sep 4 '21 at 17:43
  • $\begingroup$ @lurscher Well I am sorry, I suppose I have misexplained what I wanted to say. The last graybox is what I had written down directly from "result"(or the RHS of what I want to prove), which ought to be connected with the equation in component-vector-notation right above. I believe some terms need to be contracted or modulated so that the two equations meet, and that connection is what I am looking for. $\endgroup$
    – HANEUL
    Sep 5 '21 at 4:32
2
$\begingroup$

It can be solved by using the fact that $\varepsilon_{ijk} a_j b_k = - \varepsilon_{ijk} a_k b_j$.

\begin{align*} \frac{D \delta S_i}{D t} &= \varepsilon_{ijk}(\nabla v_{jl} \delta y_k \delta x_l + \nabla v_{kl} \delta y_l \delta_j) \\ &= \varepsilon_{ijk}(\nabla v_{jl} \delta y_k \delta x_l - \nabla v_{jl} \delta y_l \delta_k) \\ &= \varepsilon_{ijk}(\delta_{ln} \delta_{km} - \delta_{kn} \delta_{lm}) \nabla v_{jl} \delta x_n \delta y_m \\ &= \varepsilon_{ijk}\varepsilon_{plk}\varepsilon_{pnm} \nabla v_{jl} \delta x_n \delta y_m \\ &= (\delta_{ip} \delta_{jl} - \delta_{il} \delta_{jp}) \nabla v_{jl} \delta S_p \\ &= \nabla v_{jj} \delta S_i - \nabla v_{ji} \delta S_j \end{align*}

$\endgroup$

Your Answer

By clicking “Post Your Answer”, you agree to our terms of service, privacy policy and cookie policy

Not the answer you're looking for? Browse other questions tagged or ask your own question.