Intereting Posts

About the Continuum Hypothesis
Question about a projective module in a direct sum
Testing whether a hypersurface is singular
Prove $e^x – e^y \leq e |x-y|$ for $x$ belonging to $$
Basic question regarding a finitely generated graded $A$-algebra
Norm of a Kernel Operator
Counting paths in a square matrix
Linear transformations map lines to lines
Implementation of Monotone Cubic Interpolation
Sum of discrete and continuous random variables with uniform distribution
If $\gcd(a,b)=1$ then, $\gcd(a^2,b^2)=1$
Factorization of ideals in $\mathbb{Z}$
How to get a reflection vector?
Show that $e^{-\beta} = \frac{1}{\sqrt{\pi}} \int_{0}^{\infty} \frac{e^{-u}}{\sqrt{u}} e^{-\beta^2 / 4u} du$.
Calculate $\int_C{y^2\:ds}$ where $C$ is $x^2+y^2=9$

Is it possible to get the value of:

\begin{equation}

\underbrace{\left[\nabla\times\left[\nabla\times\left[\ldots\nabla\times\right.\right.\right.}_{\infty\text{-times taking curl operator}}\mathbf{V}\left.\left.\left.\right]\right]\ldots\right] = ?

\end{equation}

For any possible values of vector $\mathbf{V}$.

- Calculate the viewing-angle on a square (3d-calc)
- Why is $\operatorname{Div}\big(\operatorname{Curl} F\big) = 0$? Intuition?
- Do the BAC-CAB identity for triple vector product have some intepretation?
- How to solve $\mathrm{diag}(x) \; A \; x = \mathbf{1}$ for $x\in\mathbb{R}^n$ with $A\in\mathbb{R}^{n \times n}$?
- $\nabla U=0 \implies U=\mathrm{constant}$ only if $U$ is defined on a connected set?
- CS231N Backpropagation gradient

- $f: \mathbb{R}^2\to \mathbb{R}^2$ is differentiable, and satisfies an inequality that involves its partials - show that f is a bijection.
- Divergence theorem for a second order tensor
- Integrating over a specific vector field
- Helmholtz theorem
- Find the Vector Equation of a line perpendicular to the plane.
- Intuition behind curl identity
- The proof of the Helmholtz decomposition theorem through Neumann boundary value problem
- How is “area” a vector?
- Rate of change of direction of vector-valued function
- Surface integral of normal components summations on a sphere

For a general vector field $\mathbf{V}$, this sequence need not converge. Consider for example $\mathbf{V} = (e^{x-y}, e^{x-y}, 0)$. We have $\nabla \times \mathbf{V} = \mathbf{W} = (0,0,2 e^{x-y})$, and $\nabla \times \mathbf{W} = -2 \mathbf{V}$, and the cycle then repeats with a factor of $-2$.

It’s worth noting that this operation is “unnatural” from the point of view of differential forms; curl is really the $d$ operator taking 1-forms to 2-forms; it’s just that in $\mathbb{R}^3$, both 1-forms and 2-forms can be viewed as vector fields. But the result of the curl operator is a 2-form, which is not something that it makes sense to take the curl of. The other relations you cite in your comment don’t suffer from this problem: grad takes 0-forms to 1-forms (so curl grad makes sense) and div takes 2-forms to 3-forms (so div curl makes sense), and they are both special cases of the fact that $d^2 = 0$.

The identity

$$

\nabla \times (\nabla \times \mathbf{A})=\nabla(\nabla \cdot \mathbf{A})-\nabla^2 \mathbf{A}

$$

is standard (where $\nabla^2$ denotes the component-wise Laplacian). Applying it repeatedly to $\nabla \times \mathbf{A}$ and using the fact that $\nabla \times (\nabla f)$ vanishes, we can see inductively that

$$

(\nabla \times)^{2n+1}\mathbf{A}=(-1)^n\nabla \times (\nabla^2)^n \mathbf{A} \, .

$$

So, when there’s any hope of your thing converging, it’ll be because the iterations of $-\nabla^2$ converge component-wise. Roughly speaking, this will happen when the Fourier transforms of your components are supported within some appropriate sphere, but getting the details right could be tricky (especially in cases where it includes some piece of the sphere’s boundary).

A little more precisely, the equivalent of $-\nabla^2$ in the frequency domain is multiplication by $4\pi^2|\xi|^2$, so if $\operatorname{supp} \hat f \subset \{|\xi|<1/(2\pi)\}$ everything will converge to $0$. If $\operatorname{supp} \hat f \subset \{|\xi|\leq 1/(2\pi)\}$ everything should still converge; if $\hat f$ is a distribution with positive mass on the boundary of the sphere it should converge to that, but the analysis is icky enough that I don’t want to say anything too definite…

You then have to worry about the even iterates, which you can get by replacing $\mathbf{A}$ with $\nabla \times\mathbf{A}$ everywhere in the above identity; there’s no real reason why the even and odd iterates ought to have much to do with each other. On the other hand, in the nice case everything will converge to $0$ anyway, so this won’t really matter.

Two applications of $\nabla$ yield $\nabla \times (\nabla \times F) = -\nabla^2 F + \nabla(\nabla \cdot F)$. Why? Well, setting $F = \sum_i F_i e_i$ where $e_i$ is the standard cartesian frame of $\mathbb{R}^3$ allows the formula:

$$ (\nabla \times F)_k = \sum_{ij} \epsilon_{ijk} \partial_i F_j $$

Curling once more,

$$ [\nabla \times (\nabla \times F)]_m = \sum_{kl}\epsilon_{klm}\partial_k\sum_{ij} \epsilon_{ijl} \partial_i F_j $$

But, the antismmetric symbol is constant and we can write this as

$$ [\nabla \times (\nabla \times F)]_m = \sum_{ijkl}\epsilon_{klm}\epsilon_{ijl} \partial_k \partial_i F_j $$

A beautiful identity states:

$$ \sum_{l}\epsilon_{klm}\epsilon_{ijl} = -\sum_{l}\epsilon_{kml}\epsilon_{ijl} =

-\delta_{ki}\delta_{mj}+\delta_{kj}\delta_{mi}$$

Hence,

$$ [\nabla \times (\nabla \times F)]_m = \sum_{ijk}(-\delta_{ki}\delta_{mj}+\delta_{kj}\delta_{mi}) \partial_k \partial_i F_j = \sum_i [-\partial_i^2F_m+\partial_m(\partial_iF_i)]$$

and the claim follows since $m$ is arbitrary. Now, let’s try for 3:

$$ \nabla \times (\nabla \times (\nabla \times F)) = \nabla \times \bigl[-\nabla^2 F + \nabla(\nabla \cdot F)\bigr] =\nabla \times (-\nabla^2 F)$$

I used the curl of a gradient is zero. This need not be trivial, take $F = <x^2z,0,0>$ as an example. I suppose I could have shot for a four-folded curl by doubly applying the identity.

$$ \nabla \times (\nabla \times (\nabla \times (\nabla \times F))) =?$$

Set $G = -\nabla^2 F $ since we know the gradient term vanishes,

$$ \nabla \times (\nabla \times G) = -\nabla^2 G + \nabla \cdot G = \nabla^2(\nabla^2 F)-\nabla [\nabla \cdot (\nabla^2 F)]$$

So, there’s the four-folded curl. Well, I see no reason this terminates. I guess you can give it a name. I propose we call (ordered as the edit indicates) $ \nabla \times \nabla \times \cdots \times \nabla = \top$

- The primitive spectrum of a unital ring
- How to prove $\bar{m}$ is a zero divisor in $\mathbb{Z}_n$ if and only if $m,n$ are not coprime
- How to show that $7\mid a^2+b^2$ implies $7\mid a$ and $7\mid b$?
- How many cycles, $C_{4}$, does the graph $Q_{n}$ contain?
- An inequality from Littlewood's Miscellany
- How to find the maximum value for the given $xcos{\lambda}+ysin{\lambda}$?
- Calculating Distance of a Point from an Ellipse Border
- Eigen Values Proof
- How find the maximum value of $|bc|$
- $A \oplus B = A \oplus C$ imply $B = C$?
- Is a function whose derivative vanishes at rationals constant?
- The definition of distance and how to prove the ruler postulate in Euclidean geometry
- What's the rationale for requiring that a field be a $\boldsymbol{non}$-$\boldsymbol{trivial}$ ring?
- Why do we use the word “scalar” and not “number” in Linear Algebra?
- Can $\{(f(t),g(t)) \mid t\in \}$ cover the entire square $ \times $ ?