Talk:Vector Laplacian
 | The contents of the Vector Laplacian page were merged into Laplace operator#Vector Laplacian on 31 October 2020. For the contribution history and old versions of the merged article please see its history. |
Generalization
[edit]The article says the vector Laplacian is the divergence of the gradient of a vector... This surely makes no sense? --Leperous (talk) 14:30, 16 December 2008 (UTC)
- No, it's fine --- the gradient of a vector will give you a matrix, and you can then take the divergence of this matrix as discussed in at divergence. TotientDragooned (talk) 18:55, 4 March 2010 (UTC)
Vector Versus Scalar Laplace Operator
[edit]While it may be easy fare for the seasoned mathematician to figure out that the same symbol is being used for both the vector and scalar transforms, and it may make perfect sense to do so, and may be conventionally correct, the article may throw off some people with the reduced cartesian equation nevertheless. Maybe a different typeface and bolding one of them might help. (140.232.0.68 (talk) 20:01, 5 August 2011 (UTC))
Typo?
[edit]I find in other places (for example on Wolfram MathWorld), that the vector laplacian is defined with a minus sign in front of the double curl. Is there a reason it's defined differently here, or is it just a typo? I'm going to change it to a minus for now.
Typo 2?
[edit]For the equation for grad T, T_{uv} should be equal to d(T_u)/dv and not d(T_v)/du as written in the article.
Dimensions?
[edit]Restricted to 3D? If so, it should say so. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 128.243.2.30 (talk) 14:50, 26 February 2020 (UTC)