Timeline for Nabla commutation in electromagnetism
Current License: CC BY-SA 4.0
10 events
| when toggle format | what | by | license | comment | |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Dec 16, 2021 at 17:46 | history | edited | Frobenius |
edited tags
|
|
| Dec 16, 2021 at 13:20 | answer | added | Frobenius | timeline score: 4 | |
| Dec 16, 2021 at 13:16 | comment | added | J. Murray | I'm not sure what you mean by "that needs to be zero for a set of charged particles." Is this en route to deriving the Poynting theorem? Some more context would be helpful. As it stands, $\vec v \cdot \nabla = v_x\partial_x + v_y\partial_y + v_z\partial_z$ is basically what it looks like. | |
| Dec 16, 2021 at 12:56 | review | Close votes | |||
| Dec 19, 2021 at 23:13 | |||||
| Dec 16, 2021 at 12:52 | history | edited | Euler | CC BY-SA 4.0 |
deleted 10 characters in body
|
| Dec 16, 2021 at 12:52 | comment | added | Euler | Yes, is a normal product, I'ts an error, I will correct it, thanks | |
| Dec 16, 2021 at 12:46 | comment | added | Oбжорoв | $(A\cdot B)\cdot C$ does not make sense. $A\cdot B$ is a product of two vectors giving a number. You can't take the dot product of a number with a vector. Maybe you mean $(A\cdot B) C$? | |
| Dec 16, 2021 at 12:46 | history | edited | J.G. | CC BY-SA 4.0 |
edited title
|
| Dec 16, 2021 at 12:34 | comment | added | Roger V. | Working in components could help - it is tedious, but one can understand a great deal. | |
| Dec 16, 2021 at 12:22 | history | asked | Euler | CC BY-SA 4.0 |