0

According to the wikipedia definition of Jacobian, if $f:\mathbb{R}^{n}\to \mathbb{R}$, then $Jf=\nabla f^{T}$, where $Jf$ is the jacobian of $f$ and $\nabla f$ is its gradient. Note: I simply took the special case $f:\mathbb{R}^{n}\to \mathbb{R}^{m}, m=1$

However, in polar coordinates, we know the gradient of a function $f(r,\theta)$ is: $$ \begin{pmatrix} \frac{ \partial f }{ \partial r } (r,\theta) \\\\ \frac{1}{r}\frac{ \partial f }{ \partial \theta }(r,\theta) \end{pmatrix} $$ while the Jacobian, which does not depend on the coordinate system, should still be: $$ \begin{pmatrix} \frac{ \partial f }{ \partial r } (r,\theta) , \quad \frac{ \partial f }{ \partial \theta }(r,\theta) \end{pmatrix} $$

So its off by the factor $\frac{1}{r}$. Am I wrong somewhere, if not how can we explain this?

KiwiKiwi
  • 169
  • Not really, as your link does not mention Jacobians. It talks about holonomic basis, which according to wikipedia are related to manifolds, which I am not familiar with. – KiwiKiwi Mar 10 '24 at 19:24
  • The link precisely goes to the bottom of why in some conventions there is the factor $\frac1r$ and in some there is not. Where did I mention manifolds? The duplicate is self contained. In short: the Jacobian is usually a bunch of partial derivatives. The gradient in the coordinate basis is the same. Physicists like the orthonormal basis. That's why they normalize by $\frac1r,.$ – Kurt G. Mar 10 '24 at 19:27

0 Answers0