Take the 2-minute tour ×
Mathematics Stack Exchange is a question and answer site for people studying math at any level and professionals in related fields. It's 100% free, no registration required.

Let $f$, $g$ and $h$ be any $C^{2}$ scalar functions. Using the standard identities of vector calculus, prove that;

$$ \nabla \cdot \left( f\nabla g \times \nabla h \right) = \nabla f \cdot \left(\nabla g \times \nabla h \right)$$

Here is my working out so far; using identity 8 $$ \nabla \cdot \left( f\nabla g \times \nabla h \right) = \nabla h \cdot \left(\nabla \times f\nabla h \right) - f\nabla g \cdot \left( \nabla \cdot \nabla h \right) $$ and the div of a scalar is a vector hence $$ = \overrightarrow H \cdot \left(\nabla \times f\nabla \overrightarrow G \right) - f\nabla \overrightarrow G \cdot \left( \nabla \cdot \overrightarrow H \right) $$ and then using vector identity 10 gives me $$= \overrightarrow H \cdot \left(f\nabla \times \overrightarrow G +\nabla f \times \overrightarrow G\right) - f\nabla \overrightarrow G \cdot \left( \nabla \cdot \overrightarrow H \right) $$ and now I don't know whats next?

Here are the vector identities listed below

Vector Identities

share|improve this question
    
What have you tried so far? –  Daryl Jun 1 '13 at 6:51
1  
@Daryl Hi Daryl, please see my updated post. –  amanda Jun 1 '13 at 7:45

2 Answers 2

up vote 4 down vote accepted

HINT: Use identity 7 with $\mathbf{F}=\nabla g\times\nabla h$.

share|improve this answer
    
The question is a lot easier than i thought, Thankyou –  amanda Jun 1 '13 at 7:50

HINT: Use Identity 8 with $\mathbf{F} = f\nabla g$, $\mathbf{G} = \nabla h$: $$ \nabla \cdot (f\nabla g\times \nabla h)= \nabla h\cdot \big(\nabla \times (f\nabla g)\big)- f\nabla g\cdot \big(\nabla\times (\nabla h)\big). $$ Notice $\nabla \times (\nabla h) = 0$. Then use Identity 10 on $\nabla \times (f\nabla g)$.

share|improve this answer
    
Hi Shuhao, that was exactly what I did before writing this question but I thought I was wrong because I couldn't make out anything of it after that. I have updated my post to show my attempt, and now I am unsure of what is next? –  amanda Jun 1 '13 at 7:41
    
@amanda In the second term it is $\nabla \times (\nabla h)$, not $\nabla \cdot (\nabla h)$. –  Shuhao Cao Jun 1 '13 at 15:54
    
Ow, I see where I went wrong, thankyou for that Shuhao –  amanda Jun 2 '13 at 15:36

Your Answer

 
discard

By posting your answer, you agree to the privacy policy and terms of service.

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