A community for students.
Here's the question you clicked on:
 0 viewing
anonymous
 one year ago
ques
anonymous
 one year ago
ques

This Question is Closed

anonymous
 one year ago
Best ResponseYou've already chosen the best response.0Consider a surface given by \[\phi(x,y,z)\] \[x^2+y^2+z^2=9\] Now the normal to the surface is given by \[\vec \nabla\phi=2x\hat i+2y\hat j+2z\hat k\] Now my question is where did the 9 go, I know if u apply the operator to it will become 0 but shouldn't it be something like \[2x\hat i+2y\hat j+2z\hat k=\vec 0\]

ganeshie8
 one year ago
Best ResponseYou've already chosen the best response.2We may think of the given surface \(x^2+y^2+z^2=9\) as a specific level surface for the level set of function : \( \phi(x,y,z)=x^2+y^2+z^2\), namely, \(\phi=9\).

ganeshie8
 one year ago
Best ResponseYou've already chosen the best response.2Next we use the fact the gradient of a function is perpendicular to the level surface to find a normal vector of given surface

ganeshie8
 one year ago
Best ResponseYou've already chosen the best response.2"gradient" operates on a function doesn't make much sense to say "gradient of an equation"

anonymous
 one year ago
Best ResponseYou've already chosen the best response.0Yes, but shouldn't u also apply operator on the right side ??

ganeshie8
 one year ago
Best ResponseYou've already chosen the best response.2we're simply using the fact that \(\nabla \phi \perp (\text{level surface}) \) to get a normal vector

anonymous
 one year ago
Best ResponseYou've already chosen the best response.0Let me think about it lol

ganeshie8
 one year ago
Best ResponseYou've already chosen the best response.2I think your equation is also correct as the gradient of \(g(x,y,z)=0\) is the 0 vector

ganeshie8
 one year ago
Best ResponseYou've already chosen the best response.2In case you want to see it geometrically, may be consider a function of two variables, sketch the level curves, compute the gradient and verify...

anonymous
 one year ago
Best ResponseYou've already chosen the best response.0gradient is only perpendicular at any point of the surface if it's a level surface right?

ganeshie8
 one year ago
Best ResponseYou've already chosen the best response.2Lets say, the function f(x,y) is defined for all real values of ordered pairs (x,y) then \(\nabla f(a,b)\) is perpendicular to the specific level curve that passes through the point \((a,b)\)

anonymous
 one year ago
Best ResponseYou've already chosen the best response.0I think I understand it better now, you can only find gradient of a function, the function is \[x^2+y^2+z^2\] Doesn't make sense to find gradient of an equation We're really just using the fact that gradient is perpendicular to the level surface....

anonymous
 one year ago
Best ResponseYou've already chosen the best response.0as long as the curve is level

ganeshie8
 one year ago
Best ResponseYou've already chosen the best response.2Nice! It will be more illuminating to see these geometrically...

anonymous
 one year ago
Best ResponseYou've already chosen the best response.0But I don't understand the point of level surface. Suppose a point P on a level surface, if the value of the function at the point P is the same as the value of any other point on the surface, it's a level surface, but of course it will be same, because all points on the surface satisfy the equation of the surface

ganeshie8
 one year ago
Best ResponseYou've already chosen the best response.2Right, as you move on a specific level surface, the value of function remains constant. The gradient vector changes accordingly to remain perpendicular to the surface.

anonymous
 one year ago
Best ResponseYou've already chosen the best response.0can u give an example of a non level surface?? even if we take \[\phi(x,y,z)=x+c\] where c is a constant \[\phi(x,y,z)x=c\] This in itself defines a new function which makes it a level surface \[\psi(x,y,z)=c\] Now the value of the function at all points will be same and equal to c because they all lie on the surface it seems as if there is nothing like a "non level surface"

ganeshie8
 one year ago
Best ResponseYou've already chosen the best response.2you get level surface by fixing the value of the function, so every intersection of function and a horizontal plane is a level surface

ganeshie8
 one year ago
Best ResponseYou've already chosen the best response.2maybe i shouldn't say that, because, that makes sense only for a function of 2 variables..

ganeshie8
 one year ago
Best ResponseYou've already chosen the best response.2You're right, any equation in "n" variables can be thought of as a "level surface" of a function of "n" variables. The function itself requires "n+1" axes to visualize, but the level surface requires only "n" axes.

anonymous
 one year ago
Best ResponseYou've already chosen the best response.0What i'm saying is that for a level surface we have the form \[\phi(x,y,z)=c\] even if we have an equation such that both left and right side are entirely made of variables we can always rearrange to have all variables on one side and a constant on the right side \[x^2+y^2+z^2=xyz\]\[\frac{x^2+y^2+z^2}{xyz}=1\] of the form \[\phi(x,y,z)=c\] So it seems like no matter what we can't have a non level surface ??

ganeshie8
 one year ago
Best ResponseYou've already chosen the best response.2RIght, you can always define a function such that your surface belongs to its level set

ganeshie8
 one year ago
Best ResponseYou've already chosen the best response.2Thats how we use gradient to compute a normal vector of ANY surface

anonymous
 one year ago
Best ResponseYou've already chosen the best response.0oh ok I understand now, so it's a level surface for \[\psi(x,y,z)=\frac{x^2+y^2+z^2}{xyz}\] but not for \[\phi(x,y,z)=x^2+y^2+z^2\]

ganeshie8
 one year ago
Best ResponseYou've already chosen the best response.2Yep! the connection between gradient and normal vector is with level surfaces

anonymous
 one year ago
Best ResponseYou've already chosen the best response.0It depends on our function, if it's level or not !!

ganeshie8
 one year ago
Best ResponseYou've already chosen the best response.2Hmm that sounds okay I guess! but honestly i never heard that phrase "if its level or not" before haha!

ganeshie8
 one year ago
Best ResponseYou've already chosen the best response.2np:) I think you will like this video... http://ocw.mit.edu/courses/mathematics/1802multivariablecalculusfall2007/videolectures/lecture12gradient/ when you're free try watching..

anonymous
 one year ago
Best ResponseYou've already chosen the best response.0Yeh actually my syllabus is really messed up, they are teaching us vector calculus without teaching us about multivariable functions or partial derivatives For example \[ d(f(x,y,z))=\frac{\partial f}{\partial x}dx+\frac{\partial f}{\partial y}dy+\frac{\partial f}{\partial z}dz\] I didn't even knew what this meant and we were using it, I had to look it up separately to understand it

ganeshie8
 one year ago
Best ResponseYou've already chosen the best response.2Ahh then I think those lectures really supplement your course of vector calculus. Except for the french accent, Prof. Denis Auroux is really good !

anonymous
 one year ago
Best ResponseYou've already chosen the best response.0thx ill check it out

IrishBoy123
 one year ago
Best ResponseYou've already chosen the best response.0i spent ages chasing my tail on this so i hope this might be helpful  as i did find some peace of mind, eventually. [at the very least, i hope it makes some sense.] strictly speaking, you do not apply the del operator to the RHS, only the LHS, ie only to \(\phi\) because you have defined \(\phi(x,y,z)\) to be constant, you can say that \(d \Phi = 0\) **provided** you remain within the constraint \(\phi(x,y,z) = c\) , that is you limit yourself to x,y,z 's on the socalled level surface. that is why you created the level surface in the first place. so, for the paraboloid \(z = x^2 + y^2\), you create the level surface \(\phi = z  x^2  y^2 = 0\) knowing that \(d \Phi = 0\) without needing to do any further analysis provided x,y,z are related by \(z = x^2 + y^2\) [which, BTW, is completely different from the scalar field \(\phi = z  x^2  y^2 \) where there is no constraint on x,y,z values you choose, and where \(\vec \nabla \phi\) just gives you the direction/scale of greatest change ] then, because \(d \Phi = \phi_x dx + \phi_y dy + \phi_z dz\) it follows that \(\phi_x dx + \phi_y dy + \phi_z dz = 0\)) \(\implies <\phi _x,\phi _y, \phi _z > \bullet <dx,dy,dz> = 0\) and again because of the constraint \(\phi(x,y,z) = c\), you have \(\phi(x+dx,y+dy,z+dz) = c\) so <dx,dy,dz> runs along the surface and is the tangent vector, so \(\vec \nabla \phi \) must be the normal vector. this might sound trivial, but if you moved the paraboloid 5 units up the z axis as \(z = x^2 + y^2 + 5\), you could say \(\phi = z  x^2  y^2 = 5\) or \(\phi = z  x^2  y^2 5 = 0\) and by definition, because of the constraint, \(d \phi = 0\) and then apply the operator to the LHS with the same result At least that's how i have come to see it...
Ask your own question
Sign UpFind more explanations on OpenStudy
Your question is ready. Sign up for free to start getting answers.
spraguer
(Moderator)
5
→ View Detailed Profile
is replying to Can someone tell me what button the professor is hitting...
23
 Teamwork 19 Teammate
 Problem Solving 19 Hero
 Engagement 19 Mad Hatter
 You have blocked this person.
 ✔ You're a fan Checking fan status...
Thanks for being so helpful in mathematics. If you are getting quality help, make sure you spread the word about OpenStudy.