0
|
6718 Views
|
8 Replies
|
1 Total Likes
View groups...
Share
GROUPS:

# Derivative of complete Elliptical integral and show steps of solution.

Posted 9 years ago
 Hello, Please I use below code to calculate partial derivative of U with respect to r and y. I have couple of questions. I know the derivative of E(k) =(E(k)-K(k))/k. However, the result shows that the answer is E(k) =(E(k)-K(k))/2*k. I do not know why there is 2 in denominator. Where K(k) and E(k) are complete elliptical integral kind one and two Clear[r, y, Y, k, U, Ur, Uy] k = r^3 + y^3; U := EllipticE[k]; Ur = D[U, y] // FullSimplify Uy = D[U, r] // FullSimplify Result from Mathematica is (3 y^2 (EllipticE[r^3 + y^3] - EllipticK[r^3 + y^3]))/(2 (r^3 + y^3)) (3 r^2 (EllipticE[r^3 + y^3] - EllipticK[r^3 + y^3]))/(2 (r^3 + y^3)) The answer should be (3 y^2 (EllipticE[r^3 + y^3] - EllipticK[r^3 + y^3]))/((r^3 + y^3)) (3 r^2 (EllipticE[r^3 + y^3] - EllipticK[r^3 + y^3]))/((r^3 + y^3)) Thanks
8 Replies
Sort By:
Posted 9 years ago
 Of course, my rational self told me that Whittaker and Watson could not possibly have been wrong!
Posted 9 years ago
 Hello,Thank you so much for your reply.For this code. I am trying to find partial derivative of U with respect to y. I have k^2 = ((4*R*r)/((y - Y)^2 + (r + R)^2)). My question is. Do I have to define k= ((4Rr)/((y - Y)^2 + (r + R)^2))or k=((4Rr)/((y - Y)^2 + (r + R)^2))^1/2` In order to get denominator without 2? In other words how I can define k to get answer without 2? I still got answer with 2 even when I define k in both cases. Clear[r, R, y, Y, k, U, Ur, Uy] k = ((4*R*r)/((y - Y)^2 + (r + R)^2))^1/2; U = EllipticE[k]; Uy = D[U, y] The result -(((y - Y) (EllipticE[(2 r R)/((r + R)^2 + (y - Y)^2)] - EllipticK[(2 r R)/((r + R)^2 + (y - Y)^2)]))/((r + R)^2 + (y - Y)^2))
Posted 9 years ago
 Hello,Thank you for your reply. Really I do not know if the correct answer is with 2 in denominator or no. I am confused now.I will wait to your reply.Regards
Posted 9 years ago
 I just returned home, pulled out my ancient copy of Whittaker and Watson, and now see what the issue is. In the documentation for EllipticE in Mathematica one sees that it is defined as Integrate[(1 - m Sin[t]^2)^(1/2), {t 0, Pi/2}] whereas other definitions use m^2 as inIntegrate[(1 - m^2 Sin[t]^2)^(1/2), {t 0, Pi/2}]and this will account for the factor of 1/2 difference between the usages.So everyone is correct but the definitions of how the modulus parameter is used in the definition differ.
Posted 9 years ago
 I was going to mention this. There are indeed two common conventions for the modulus parameter, and that does give rise to confusion.
Posted 9 years ago
 The factor of 2 in the denominator appears to be correct:http://functions.wolfram.com/EllipticIntegrals/EllipticE2/20/01/02/It seems that the result without the factor of 2 in the denominator, that one finds in a number of places (e.g., http://mathworld.wolfram.com/CompleteEllipticIntegraloftheSecondKind.html and https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Ellipticintegral#Derivativeanddifferentialequation and http://dlmf.nist.gov/19.4) is not correct. (But, I am going to sit down and re-derive it in the old fashioned way by hand later today...) [[Edit: see my comment below--both are correct, but the definitions of the integral are slightly different and that accounts for the confusion.]]Consider the derivative of the argument of the Elliptic integral D[(1 - z Sin[\[Theta]]^2)^(1/2), z] which gives -(Sin[\[Theta]]^2/(2 Sqrt[1 - z Sin[\[Theta]]^2])) Now numerically integrate that (as a test case) at the value of z=1/4: NIntegrate[ Evaluate[-(Sin[\[Theta]]^2/(2 Sqrt[1 - z Sin[\[Theta]]^2])) /. z -> 1/4], {\[Theta], 0, \[Pi]/2}] which gives -0.436576 and this is the same as the value (EllipticE[z] - EllipticK[z])/(2 z) /. z -> 1/4. I do not suspect that this is a branch cut issue though perhaps someone can advise on that.
Posted 9 years ago