Mathematics Stack Exchange is a question and answer site for people studying math at any level and professionals in related fields. Join them; it only takes a minute:

Sign up
Here's how it works:
  1. Anybody can ask a question
  2. Anybody can answer
  3. The best answers are voted up and rise to the top

On page 12 of An Introduction to Theoretical Fluid Dynamics, following the introduction of a material vector field $v_i(\mathbf a,t)=J_{ij}(\mathbf a,t)V_j(\mathbf a)$ the author wrote:

$$ \frac{\mathrm D \mathbf v}{\mathrm D t} = \left. \frac{\partial \mathbf v}{\partial t} \right| _ {\mathbf x} + \mathbf u \cdot \nabla \mathbf v - \mathbf v \cdot \nabla \mathbf u \equiv v_t+\mathcal L_{\mathbf u} \mathbf v = 0 $$

Question: Shouldn't the material derivative of $\mathbf v$ be the following? Where is the "extra" term with the negative sign from?

$$ \frac{\mathrm D \mathbf v}{\mathrm D t} = \left. \frac{\partial \mathbf v}{\partial t} \right| _ {\mathbf x} + \mathbf u \cdot \nabla \mathbf v $$

Update: I believe it has something to do with Eqn. (1.22) which states that

$$ \left. \frac{\partial \mathbf v}{\partial t} \right |_{\mathbf a} = \mathbf v\cdot\nabla\mathbf u $$

share|cite|improve this question
up vote 1 down vote accepted

For some clarity the author has made the following calculation (I will explicitly give the variables that $\mathbf{v}$ depends on in each equation to avoid confusion) $$\dfrac{\mathbf{Dv}}{\mathbf{D}t} = \dfrac{\text{d}\mathbf{v}(\mathbf{x}(t),t)}{\text{d}t}= \dfrac{\text{d}\mathbf{v}(\mathbf{a},t)}{\text{d}t} = \dfrac{\partial\mathbf{v}(\mathbf{a},t)}{\partial t}\tag{1}$$ But since $\mathbf{v}$ is a material vector field it satisfies the following differential equation $$\dfrac{\partial\mathbf{v}(\mathbf{a},t)}{\partial t} = \mathbf{v}\cdot\nabla \mathbf{u}\tag{2}$$ By definition the material derivative (as it is really just a total derivative) is $$\dfrac{\mathbf{Dv}}{\mathbf{D}t} = \dfrac{\partial\mathbf{v}(\mathbf{x}(t),t)}{\partial t} + \mathbf{u}\cdot\nabla\mathbf{v}(\mathbf{x}(t),t)\tag{3}$$ Then equation $(1)$ implies that $$\dfrac{\mathbf{Dv}}{\mathbf{D}t}-\left.\dfrac{\partial\mathbf{v}}{\partial t}\right\vert_{\mathbf{a}} = 0$$ Rewriting this using equations $(2)$ and $(3)$ we arrive at $$\left.\dfrac{\partial\mathbf{v}}{\partial t}\right\vert_{\mathbf{x}} + \mathbf{u}\cdot\nabla\mathbf{v}-\mathbf{v}\cdot\nabla \mathbf{u}=0$$ The fancy expression you see in this equation has a name, the lie derivative $$\mathcal{L}_\mathbf{u}\mathbf{v} = \mathbf{u}\cdot\nabla\mathbf{v}-\mathbf{v}\cdot\nabla \mathbf{u}$$ So finally we have the result $$\mathbf{v}_t + \mathcal{L}_\mathbf{u}\mathbf{v} = 0$$

share|cite|improve this answer

My confusion has been resolved. I was assuming that the material derivative of $\mathbf v$ should be equal to 0.

However, by definition,

$$\frac{\mathbf D \mathbf v}{\mathbf D t} = \left. \frac{\partial \mathbf v}{\partial t} \right|_{\mathbf a}$$

Therefore Eqn. (1.23) holds.

share|cite|improve this answer

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.