Normal derivative of Green's function on a disk.

In summary, the conversation discusses the use of Green's function for solving the Dirichlet problem in a circular region. The question arises as to why the normal derivative of the Green's function is equal to the simple derivative with respect to the radius, rather than the more complex derivative with respect to the angle. The answer lies in the fact that on a circle, the radius is normal to the curve, so the normal derivative can be simplified to just the derivative with respect to the radius. This is often seen in other fields, such as electrostatic fields. The conversation also touches on the use of directional derivatives and the calculation of integrals using Green's function.
  • #1
yungman
5,723
242
For circular region, why is [tex]\frac{\partial}{\partial n}G(r,\theta,r_0,\phi)= \frac{\partial}{\partial r_0}G(r,\theta,r_0,\phi) [/tex] ?
Where [itex]\; \hat{n} \:[/itex] is the outward unit normal of [itex]C_R[/itex].
Let circular region [itex]D_R[/itex] with radius [itex]R \hbox { and possitive oriented boundary }\; C_R[/itex]. Let [itex]u(r_0,\theta)[/itex] be harmonic function in [itex]D_R[/itex].

The Green's function for Polar coordinate is found to be:

[tex] G(r,\theta,r_0,\phi) = \frac{1}{2} ln[R^2 \frac{r^2+r_0^2 -2rr_0 cos(\theta-\phi)}{r^2r_0^2 + R^4 - 2rr_0R^2 cos(\theta-\phi)}] [/tex]

Where [itex]\; \theta \;[/itex] is the angle of [itex]\; u(r_0,\theta_0) \;[/itex] and [itex]\; \phi \;[/itex] is the angle of the two points used in Steiner Invertion.
Next I want to solve the Dirichlet problem using Green's function. For any value of a hamonic function [itex]u(r_0,\theta_0) in D_R[/itex]. The standard formula for Dirichlet problem is:

[tex]u(r_0,\theta_0) = \frac{1}{2}\int_{C_R} u(r,\theta) \frac{\partial}{\partial n}G(r,\theta,r_0,\phi) ds[/tex]

Where [tex]\frac{\partial}{\partial n}G(r,\theta,r_0,\phi)= \nabla G(r,\theta,r_0,\phi) \;\cdot \widehat{n} [/tex]

But the book just simply use [tex]\frac{\partial}{\partial r_0}G(r,\theta,r_0,\phi) [/tex] Which is only a simple derivative of G respect to [itex]\; r_0 \;[/itex] where in this case [itex]\; r_0 = R \;[/itex] !

[tex]u(r_0,\theta_0) = \frac{1}{2}\int_{C_R} u(r,\theta) \frac{\partial}{\partial r_0}G(r,\theta,r_0,\phi) ds[/tex]

I don't understant how:

[tex]\frac{\partial}{\partial n}G(r,\theta,r_0,\phi)= \frac{\partial}{\partial r_0}G(r,\theta,r_0,\phi) [/tex]

How can a normal derivative become and simple derivative respect to [itex]\; r_0 \;[/itex] only? I know [itex] \widehat{r}_0 \;\hbox { is parallel to outward normal of }\;\; C_R \;[/itex] but the magnitude is not unity like the unit normal. Can anyone explain to me?

Thanks

Alan
 
Last edited:
Physics news on Phys.org
  • #2
Anyone?
 
  • #3
Anyone please? Even if you don't have the answer, point me where to look. I am really out of ideas. I have five PDE book and I can't find any help!
 
Last edited:
  • #4
I'm not sure I completely understand the problem statement, but in general on a circle, the radius is normal to the curve.

So if you're interested in "normal" derivatives, you usually only have to consider how things change w/ respect to radius. This is something along the lines of the argument of why (in E&M) electrostatic fields are conservative, why Gauss' law goes like 1/r^2, etc... you can "ignore" the angular components b/c they don't contribute to the overall integral.

However, you're using a function that reads like:

[tex]G(r,\theta,r_0,\phi)[/tex]

rather than simply as:

[tex]G(r,\theta,\phi)[/tex]

and it seems like r_0 is a constant.

Are you asking why a derivative is being taken with respect to something "constant" like r_0?

If so, it could perhaps be a typo.

It would make more sense to take the derivative wrt "r"..
 
  • #5
Hi Everyone,

please can you tell me why for a circle we have the normal derivative is equal to the tangential derivative, adn what is the antiderivative of a normal derivative?

wishes,
Sally
 
  • #6
youngman,
I think your using "normal derivative" in the context of a directional derivative in the normal direction.

In general a directional derivative will be the gradient dotted with a unit normal vector. Consider then the gradient operator in polar coordinates:
[itex] \nabla u(r,\theta) = \hat{r}\frac{\partial u}{\partial r} + \hat{\theta} \frac{1}{r} \frac{\partial u}{\partial \theta}[/itex]
Since [itex]\hat{n}=\hat{r}[/itex]
[itex]\nabla_\hat{n} u = \hat{r}\bullet \nabla u = \partial_r u[/itex].
 
  • #7
Thanks, and what about the tangential derivative. How can I convence my self that is equal to the normal derivative.

I need these info to be able to do the following integral by part::
[itex]\int dq G_0(q,r:k)\frac{\partial G(q,r')}{\partial n}[/itex]
so this where I want to take the antiderivative of the normal derivative.

:confused:
 
  • #8
SallyGreen said:
Thanks, and what about the tangential derivative. How can I convence my self that is equal to the normal derivative.

I need these info to be able to do the following integral by part::
[itex]\int dq G_0(q,r:k)\frac{\partial G(q,r')}{\partial n}[/itex]
so this where I want to take the antiderivative of the normal derivative.

:confused:

I'm confused too. In general the tangential derivative and normal derivative of a function relative to a curve will not be the same. In particular for a circle centered at the origin and the function f(r,theta) = f(r) the tangential derivative will be zero and normal derivative will be f'.
 
  • #9
Thanks, for the moment let us forget the tangential derivative. I only need to compute this integral by parts
∫dqG0(q,r:k)∂G(q,r′)∂n

choosing u=G0(q,r:k) and v=∂G(q,r′)\∂n
so du=∂G0(q,r:k)\∂q dv=?

where ∂G(q,r′)\∂n= n.\grad(G(q,r′))

so what is the antiderivative of the normal derivative?please help me in doing this??
 

Related to Normal derivative of Green's function on a disk.

1. What is a normal derivative of Green's function on a disk?

The normal derivative of Green's function on a disk is a mathematical concept that represents the rate of change of the Green's function in the direction perpendicular to the boundary of a disk. It is often used in solving boundary value problems in physics and engineering.

2. How is the normal derivative of Green's function on a disk calculated?

The normal derivative of Green's function on a disk can be calculated using Green's theorem, which relates the normal derivative of a function to its value on the boundary of a disk and the Laplacian of the function inside the disk.

3. What is the significance of the normal derivative of Green's function on a disk?

The normal derivative of Green's function on a disk is significant because it allows us to solve boundary value problems on a disk by converting them into an integral equation. It also provides a way to determine the value of a function at a point inside the disk based on its values on the boundary.

4. Can the normal derivative of Green's function on a disk be negative?

Yes, the normal derivative of Green's function on a disk can be negative. This indicates that the function is decreasing in the direction perpendicular to the boundary of the disk.

5. How is the normal derivative of Green's function on a disk used in real-world applications?

The normal derivative of Green's function on a disk has many practical applications, such as in solving problems involving heat conduction, fluid flow, and electromagnetic fields. It is also used in image processing and computer graphics to smooth out jagged boundaries.

Similar threads

  • Differential Equations
Replies
4
Views
2K
  • Special and General Relativity
Replies
11
Views
395
  • Differential Equations
Replies
1
Views
1K
  • Classical Physics
Replies
1
Views
320
  • Advanced Physics Homework Help
Replies
4
Views
1K
Replies
1
Views
678
  • Classical Physics
Replies
9
Views
1K
  • Advanced Physics Homework Help
Replies
29
Views
373
  • Differential Equations
Replies
1
Views
879
Replies
1
Views
1K
Back
Top