Dorst Chapter 8 Geometric Differentiation & CAGC chapter 2 Differentiation

8.2 Transformational Changes

Recall from section 7.4.3 that in Euclidean and Minkowski spaces, every orthogonal
transformation can be expressed as e−B / 2 x e B /2 where B is a bivector. Moreover, B can be
expressed as sum of commuting 2-blades, B=B1 +⋯+B k such that Bi B j=B j B i so
Bi +B j B B B B B
e =e e =e e . Also recall that e =b2 i b 2 i+1 a 2-versor. So e B is a 2 k versor, an even versor.
i j j i i

If all 2 k vectors are unit vectors, then e B is called a rotor. It seems to me that it need not be that
all 2 k vectors are linearly independent. So orthogonal transformations, even versors and
exponentials of bivectors, are all equivalent in Euclidean and Minkowski spaces. Expanding up
B
to first order in , we get equation (8.1),
2

e
−B / 2
Xe
B/2
= 1+[ ( ) ( ) ] [ ( ) ( ) ] [ ( ) ( ) ][ ( ) ( ) ]
−B 1 −B 2
2
+
2 2
+ ⋯ X 1+
B 1 B 2
+
2 2 2
+⋯ = X+
−B
2
X+
1 −B 2
2 2
X +⋯ 1+
B 1 B 2
+
2 2 2
+⋯ =

8.2.1 The Commutator Product

1
Define a product A × B= ( AB−BA ) . Clearly A × B=−B × A and if AB=BA (for example when
2
either A or B is a scalar, or when A∧B are parallel vectors) then A × B=0. Equation (8.2),
Jacobi identity
( A × B ) ×C+ ( B ×C ) × A+ ( C × A ) × B=0
1 1 1 1
( AB −BA ) × C+ ( BC−CB ) × A+ ( CA− AC ) × B= ( ABC−CAB−BAC +CBA +BCA −ABC −CBA + ACB+C
2 2 2 4
The commutator is not associative, ( A × B ) ×C ≠ A × ( B ×C ). Using Mathematica,

( ( 3 e1 +5 e 2+ e5 ) × ( −e 1−2 e2 +7 e 4 ) ) × (−11 e3 +10 e 4 ) =210 e 1+350 e 2 +70 e5

( 3 e 1+ 5 e2 +e 5 ) × ( ( −e1 −2 e2 +7 e 4 ) × ( −11e 3 +10 e 4 ) ) =143 e3 −130 e 4
Lemma: The grade of A × B∧B × A equals the grade of A , where A is an a -vector and B is a
bivector and a ≥ 2.
~ ~ ~
Proof: Easy to verify that A × B= A × B, since B=−B. Now since A × B is a linear combination
of AB∧BA , and since each of AB∧BA is a linear combination of an ( a−2 )-vector and a -vector
and an ( a+ 2 )-vector, also A × B= A a−2 + A 'a + A'a+2
'
, where Aa −2 is an ( a−2 )-vector, A'a is an a -
'' ''
vector and Aa +2 is an ( a+ 2 )-vector. We need to show that Aa −2 =A a+ 2=0. Now
~ ~ ~' ~ '' ( a−2) ( a−3 ) / 2 ( a) ( a −1 ) / 2 ' ( a+1 )( a) /2 ' '
A × B= A a−2 + Aa + A a+2=(−1 ) A a−2 + (−1 ) Aa + (−1 ) A a+ 2
 ~ ( a) ( a −1 ) / 2 ( a )( a−1) / 2 ( a )( a−1) / 2 ' ( a )( a−1) /2 ' '
A × B=(−1 ) A × B= (−1 ) A a−2+ (−1 ) A a+ (−1 ) A a+2
So either Aa −2 =0 or (−1 )( a−2) (a−3) /2= (−1 )(a )( a−1)/ 2 for all a , which is false, for example when a=5.
Similarly, either A'a'+2=0 or (−1 )( a+1) (a )/ 2=(−1 )( a) (a−1 )/2 for all a , which is false, for example when
a=5.
Another proof of the lemma. BA=¿. AB= A ⌊ B ¿ ¿. It’s easily verified that B ⌋ A= A ⌊ B and
B∧ A= A ∧ B . Further, using Chisolm formula (140) ⟨ A a B b ⟩ a+b−2 j =(−1 ) ⟨ B b A a ⟩ a+b−2 j for the
ab− j

1 1
case b=2 , j=1, we get that ⟨ A a B 2 ⟩a =−⟨ B 2 Aa ⟩a . So B× A= ( BA−AB ) = 2 ⟨ BA ⟩a =⟨ BA ⟩ a.
2 2
Similarly, A × B= ⟨ AB ⟩a . So this shows that B× A= ⟨ B× A ⟩ a. Furthermore, it shows that BA=¿
and AB= A ⌊ B ¿ ¿. See “2 ‫ ”הערות מתמטיות גא‬on Hestenes paper on projective geometry, equation
(2.30).
Suppose A=x , a vector. Then x × B is a vector, and in fact, it is easily checked that x × B=¿.
This is true not only for B a bivector, but also for any even graded 2 k -vector. On the other hand,
for odd grades ( 2 k +1 ) -vectors, x × B=x ∧ B . See “‫ ”הערות מתימטיות ח‬on equations (2.27), (2.28).
8.2.2 Rotor induced changes
Let’s accept equation (8.3) since it is just straight calculation. B is a bivector, X is r -vector.
−B / 2 B/2 1 1
e Xe =X + X × B+ ( X × B ) × B+ ( ( X × B ) × B ) × B+ ⋯
2! 3!
which is a series of r -vectors, which is an r -vector.
So in the case X is a vector x , this becomes equation (7.22),
−B / 2 B /2
e x e =x +¿
which is a series of vectors, which is a vector.
We can use for the bivector δB , where B is any bivector and δ a small scalar. So
2 3
δ ( δ
X × B ) × B+ ( ( X × B ) × B ) × B+ ⋯
−δB /2 δB/2
e Xe = X +δX × B+
2! 3!
If δ is sufficiently small, then all terms can be ignored except the first two. In the case of X being
a vector x , e−δB /2 x e δB/ 2 ≈ x+ δ x × B=x +δ ¿ . Now ¿ is orthogonal to x , so the transformation can’t
change the norm of x , only rotate it, and since δ is small, the transformation is a small rotation.
Skip the rest of section 8.2, subsections 8.2.3, 8.2.4, 8.2.5.
8.4 Scalar Differentiation
We have a function f from the scalars to multivectors. Since two multivectors can be added, the
f ( τ +e )−f ( τ )
expression ∂ τ f ≡∂ τ f ( τ ) ≡ lim , if it exists, is some multivector. Dorst calls this
ϵ→0 ϵ
differentiation a scalar operator, because it commutes with all elements of the algebra. Namely,
if A is a multivector, then Af ( τ ) is a geometric product of multivectors. And ∂ τ ( Af ( τ ) ) =A ∂τ f ( τ ),
as can be easily checked. So here ∂ τ acts as a scalar λ , λAf ( τ )= Aλf ( τ ). Also, suppose
n
f ( τ )=∑ ⟨ f ( τ ) ⟩ r . Then ∂ τ ( ⟨ f ( τ ) ⟩r )=⟨ ∂τ f ( τ ) ⟩ r , namely ∂ τ is grade preserving. This is similar to
i i i
i=1

⟨ λA ⟩r= λ ⟨ A ⟩r . Note that ∂ τ is a linear operator, ∂ τ ( αf ( τ ) + βg ( τ ) )=α ∂τ f ( τ )+ β ∂ τ g ( τ ), as can easily

be checked.
The proof of the product rule in elementary calculus works here too
f ( τ +e ) g ( τ + e ) −f ( τ ) g ( τ ) f ( τ +e ) g ( τ + e ) −f ( τ + e ) g ( τ ) +f ( τ+ e ) g ( τ )−f ( τ ) g ( τ ) g (τ
∂ τ ( fg )=lim =¿ lim =¿ lim f ( τ +e )
ϵ→ 0 ϵ ϵ→0 ϵ ϵ→0

Note that in scalar valued function of scalars, we have ( fg )' =f ' g+ f g' =gf ' + g ' f . But here the
second equality is false in general. Another rule is ∂ τ [ f ∘ g ] =∂ τ g ∂g f .
Dorst first example. x ( τ ) is a vector valued function, so for all τ , x ( τ ) is a vector and so is ∂ τ x .
We are given the derivative ∂ τ x and use it to calculate the derivative of ∂ τ [ x 2 ]=∂τ [ xx ]. The third
ab+ba
equality comes from the result that for any two vectors, a ∙ b= . Dorst justification for that
2
equality “inner product definition” means that if the geometric product is given, then the inner
product of vectors is defined that way. But often the geometric product is defined using the inner
and exterior products. The result is 2 x ∙ ∂τ x=2 ∂τ x ∙ x .
Second example. Given a function from τ to a bivector I ( τ ) φ ( τ ), and its derivative ∂ τ ( I φ ) , which
is also a bivector, and a blade X 0, calculate the derivative of X ( τ )=e−I φ/2 X 0 e I φ/ 2.

∂τ ( e )=∂τ ( e− I φ/2 ) X 0 e I φ /2 +e− I φ/2 ∂τ ( X 0 ) e I φ/ 2+ e−I φ /2 X 0 ∂τ ( e I φ /2 )=e−I φ/ 2 ∂τ (−I φ / 2 ) X 0 e I φ/2 +e− I φ/ 2 X 0 e I φ /2

−I φ/2 I φ/ 2
X0 e

Here I used the chain rule, but I assumed the order ∂ τ [ f ∘ g ] =∂ g f ∂τ g, but the order should be the
opposite. It makes no difference here. We need to show that e− I φ/2 ∂τ (−I φ/2 )=∂τ (−I φ /2 ) e− I φ/ 2.
Here we assume that the change of I is in its own plane. So
∂ τ (−I φ/2 )=a ∧b=( α 1 e 1 +α 2 e 2 ) ∧ ( β 1 e 1 + β 2 e 2 )=( α 1 β2 −α 2 β 1 ) e1 ∧ e 2, and
e− I φ/2 =α −I β=α−β e 1 ∧ e2. So
 − I φ/2
e ∂τ (−I φ/2 )=( α −β e 1 ∧ e 2)( α 1 β2−α 2 β 1) e 1 ∧ e 2=α ( α 1 β 2−α 2 β 1) e 1 ∧ e2 −β ( α 1 β 2−α 2 β 1) ( e1 ∧e 2 )( e1 ∧e 2 )=( α 1
So

(
−
−1
e− I φ/2 ∂τ (−I φ/2 ) X 0 e I φ/ 2+ e−I φ /2 X 0 e I φ/ 2 ∂ τ ( I φ/2 )=∂τ (−I φ/2 ) e−I φ/ 2 X 0 e I φ/2 +e− I φ/ 2 X 0 e I φ/2 ∂τ ( I φ /2 )= ∂ ( I φ) e
2 τ
8.4.1 Application: Radius of Curvature of a Planar Curve
It seems that what Dorst calls a local tangent curve, is called the osculating circle (Wikipedia
“Osculating circle”). In Wikipedia the second derivative of the curve is perpendicular to the first
derivative of the curve, toward the center of the osculating circle. But that is false. Start with a
curve parametrized by t where there are two functions x ( t ) , y ( t ) such that x ( t ) e1 + y ( t ) e 2 are
points on the curve. A circle centered at C=a e 1 +b e 2 with radius r , contains a point α e1 + β e2 iff
2 2
( α −a )2+ ( β −b )2=r 2. Define a function Φ ( t , a ,b ,r )=( x ( t )−a ) + ( y ( t )−b ) −r 2. So for each point
P ( t ) =x ( t ) e 1 + y (t ) e 2 on the curve, Φ compares the distance squared ( P ( t ) −C ) 2 to r 2. For a given
∂Φ
t=t 0, we want to find a , b , r such that Φ ( t 0 , a , b , r )=0 and ( t , a , b , r )=0 and
∂t 0
2
∂Φ 1
2 ( 0
t , a , b ,r )=0 . This gives three equations for three unknowns. The curvature then be . The
∂t r
three equations are (omit t 0 for brevity, but it’s understood that P , Ṗ , P̈ , x , ẋ , ẍ , y , ẏ , ÿ are
evaluated at t 0). Note that P−C is the vector from the center of the circle to the tangent point.
( P−C )2−r 2 =( x−a )2 + ( y−b )2−r 2 =0
( P−C ) ∙ Ṗ=( x−a ) ẋ+ ( y−a ) ẏ=0
2 2
Ṗ ∙ Ṗ+ ( P−C ) ∙ P̈= ẋ + ẏ + ( x−a ) ẍ + ( y−b ) ÿ=0
The first equation says that P ( t 0 ) is on the circle. The second equation says that the tangent to the
curve at P ( t 0 ) is perpendicular to the radius vector from the center of the circle to P ( t 0 ), and is
parallel to the tangent vector to the circle. The tangent vector to the curve is Ṗ= ẋ e 1+ ẏ e 2 and its
absolute value depends on the parametrization, how fast one moves along the curve. Similarly
the tangent to the circle depends on how the circle is parametrized. So the two tangents are
parallel but need not be equal. The second derivative of the circle always points toward its
center, but the second derivative of the curve, P̈= ẍ e 1+ ÿ e 2, need not. Yet only the component of
the second derivative perpendicular to the tangent, directed toward the center, parallel to the
second derivative of the circle, is used to calculate the parameters of the osculating circle, as seen
in the third equation.
Now let’s see how Dorst solves the three equations using GA. Using the 2nd and 3rd equations,
¿
( P−C ) ( Ṗ ∧ P̈ )=¿
P ( Ṗ ∧ P̈ )−C ( Ṗ ∧ P̈ )= Ṗ3
C=( P ( Ṗ∧ P̈ )− Ṗ ) ( Ṗ∧ P̈ ) =P−Ṗ ( Ṗ ∧ P̈ ) =P+ Ṗ ( P̈ ∧ Ṗ )
3 −1 3 3−1 −1

So the center of the osculating circle can be calculated from P , Ṗ , P̈.

−1 2 2
r = ( P−C ) =( Ṗ ( Ṗ ∧ P̈ ) ) =( Ṗ3 ( P̈∧ Ṗ )−1 )
2 2 3

So the radius of the osculating circle can be calculated from P , Ṗ , P̈.

Now P̈ Ṗ=¿ , so
P̈=¿
where Q is the vector which is the component of P̈ along Ṗ (projection), and R is the vector
which is component of P̈ perpendicular to Ṗ (rejection). Now
2 −1 2 −1
C=P− Ṗ Ṗ ( Ṗ ∧ P̈ ) =P− Ṗ R
2 2
and r 2=( Ṗ2 Ṗ ( Ṗ∧ P̈ )−1 ) =( Ṗ 2 R−1 )

Ṗ 2
r =|Ṗ2 R−1|=
|R|
So the expressions for C∧r contain the rejection R of P̈ from Ṗ but not the projection Q of P̈ on
Ṗ .
P̈ ∧ Ṗ
2 =|P̈∧ Ṗ|= √ P̈ Ṗ −( P̈⋅ Ṗ )
2
Now =I . So ( P̈ ∧ Ṗ ) I −1 2 2
. So the curvature is
|P̈ ∧ Ṗ| 2
1 |R| |( P̈∧ Ṗ ) Ṗ | |P̈ ∧ Ṗ| ( P̈ ∧ Ṗ ) I −1
−1
2 ẍ ẏ− ẋ ÿ
κ= = 2 = = = =
r Ṗ Ṗ
2
|Ṗ |
3
|Ṗ|
3
( ẋ 2+ ẏ2 )
3/2

8.5 Directional Differentiation

Let f be a function from the vectors of some vector space to a multivector in the geometric
algebra built on that vector space. Now for a fixed vector x , we may be interested how f ( x +a )
compares to f ( x ), and this of course depends on a . Define the derivative of f at x in the direction
of a to be
 f ( x+ ϵ a )−f ( x )
( a ∙ ∂ x ) f =lim ϵ
ϵ →0

∂ f ( x+ ϵ a )
CAGC page 45 equation (1.2) has another form, ¿ϵ =0. In general, a function of n scalar
∂ϵ
∂f 1
variables f ( x 1 , ⋯ , x n) , then =lim ( f ( x 1 , ⋯ , xi +ϵ , ⋯ , x n )−f ( x1 , ⋯ , x i , ⋯ , x n ) ). So in our case,
∂ xi ϵ→ 0 ϵ
∂ f ( x+ ϵ a ) 1 1
¿ϵ =0=lim ( f ( x + ( ϵ + τ ) a )−f ( x+ ϵ a ) ) ¿ϵ =0=lim ( f ( x+ τ a )−f ( x ))
∂ϵ τ →0 τ τ→0 τ

Again Dorst calls it a scalar operator because it commutes with all elements. Which means that if
A is a multivector, then ( a ∙ ∂ x ) ( Af ( x ) ) =A ( a ∙ ∂x ) f ( x ), as can easily be checked. Hestenes writes

that the directional derivative preserves grade. Namely, ( a ∙ ∂ x ) ⟨ f ( x ) ⟩ r= ⟨ ( a ∙ ∂x ) f ( x ) ⟩ r (CAGC page

46 equation (1.9)). Suppose that f ( x )=x + x ∧ b+ x ∧c ∧ d= ⟨ f ( x ) ⟩ 1+ ⟨ f ( x ) ⟩2 + ⟨ f ( x ) ⟩3.

f ( x+ ϵ a )−f ( x ) 1 1
( a ∙ ∂ x ) f =lim =¿ lim ( x +ϵ a+ ( x +ϵ a ) ∧b+ ( x+ ϵ a ) ∧ c ∧ d−x+ x ∧b+ x ∧ c ∧d ) =lim ( x +ϵ a+ x
ϵ →0 ϵ ϵ→0 ϵ ϵ→ 0 ϵ

In that sense Hestenes defines the a -directional differentiation a scalar differential operator, by
comparing that to CAGC page 4 equation (1.11), ⟨ λA ⟩r= λ ⟨ A ⟩r where λ is a scalar.
Later comment. a ∙ ∂ x is a scalar operator. That means that it must satisfy CAGC page 4 axiom
(1.11). This is all that is required. Of course this is analogous to the formula in the calculus of
vectors in 3D, only there one starts with the derivative, called the gradient, and then defined the
directional derivative, while in geometric calculus the order is reversed. There directional
derivative is the dot product of the gradient with the direction vector. So the directional
derivative is linear in both the gradient and the direction vector. In symbols, let f be a scalar
valued function of a vector, x=x e1 + y e 2+ z e 3, f ( x )=f ( x , y , z ) . Then the gradient is
∂f ∂f ∂f
∇f= e 1+ e2 + e3 , and the directional derivative in the direction of a , is the dot product
∂x ∂y ∂z
∇ f ∙ a. In GC we have ∂ x f =e1 ( e 1 ∙ ∂x ) f ( x ) +e 2 ( e2 ∙∂ x ) f ( x )+ e3 ( e 3 ∙ ∂ x ) f ( x ) . Recall that for
orthogonal bases, the dual base is the same as the original base. So this corresponds to the
gradient. And ( a ∙ ∂ x ) f ( x ) corresponds to the directional derivative. The big difference is that in
vector calculus, the directional derivative ∇ f ∙ a is a scalar, while in geometric calculus, a ∙ ∂ x is
scalar like, but ( a ∙ ∂ x ) f ( x ) in general is not a scalar.
Example. Let f ( x )=x 2.
 ( x +ϵ a ) ∙ ( x + ϵ a )−x ∙ x 2
x ∙ x+2 ϵ x ∙ a+ϵ a ∙ a−x ∙ x
( a ∙ ∂ x ) f =lim =lim =lim 2 x ∙ a+ ϵ a∙ a=2 x ∙ a
ϵ →0 ϵ ϵ →0 ϵ ϵ→0

8.5.1 Table of elementary results

Example. Let f ( x )=x .
x +ϵ a−x
( a ∙ ∂ x ) f =lim ϵ
=a
ϵ →0

So the result is a vector independent of x .

Example. Let f be the function x ↦ x ∙ b, where b is some fixed vector.
( x +ϵ a ) ∙ b−x ∙ b x ∙ b+ ϵ a ∙ b−x ∙ b
( a ∙ ∂ x ) f =lim ϵ
=lim
ϵ
=a ∙ b
ϵ →0 ϵ→0

So the result is a scalar independent of x .

Example. Given a fixed linear transformation g on the vector space, and a fixed vector b , let f be
the function x ↦ g ( x ) ∙b . In the previous example, g was the identity linear transformation.
g ( x +ϵ a ) ∙b−g ( x ) ∙ b g ( x ) ∙ b+ ϵg ( a ) ∙ b−g ( x ) ∙b
( a ∙ ∂ x ) f =lim ϵ
=lim
ϵ
=g ( a ) ∙b=a ∙ g ( b )
ϵ →0 ϵ →0

where g is the adjoint of g. So the result is a scalar independent of x .

−1 x
Example. Let f be the function x ↦ x = .
x2
x+ ϵ a x
− 2
2 2 2
x + ϵ a + 2ϵ x ∙ a x x 2 x +ϵ x 2 a−x 2 x−ϵ 2 a2 x−2 ϵ ( x ∙a ) x x 2 a−ϵ a2 x−2 ( x ∙ a ) x x 2 a
( a ∙ ∂ x ) f =lim =lim =lim 2 2 2 2 =
ϵ →0 ϵ ϵ→ 0 ϵ x 2 ( x 2 +ϵ 2 a2 +2 ϵ x ∙a ) ϵ → 0 x ( x +ϵ a + 2 ϵ x ∙ a )

−1 −1 1
Note that by equation (7.2) and Figure 7.1 page 169, 2
xa x is 2 times the reflection of a in
x x
the plane to which x is normal.
Example. Let f be the function x ↦ |x|k =( x ∙ x )k /2, where k is an integer.
k/ 2
k
| x+ ϵ a| −|x|
k
[ ( x + ϵ a ) ∙ ( x+ ϵ a ) ] k
−|x|
( a ∙ ∂ x ) f =lim ϵ
=lim
ϵ
ϵ →0 ϵ →0

I have trouble following Dorst solution. Hestenes CAGC brings a similar result in (1.35) page
51, but there it is not a directional derivative. On page 151 he instructs to derive it using the
chain rule, equation (1.15) page 48. Let g be a function which takes a vector to a scalar. And let
f be a function which takes a scalar to a multivector. So f ( g ( x ) ) takes a vector to a multivector
g ( x +ϵ a )−g ( x )
via a scalar. Let y=g ( x ). Then the a -derivative of g is a ∙ ∂ x g=lim . At each x∧a
ϵ →0 ϵ
 f ( y + δ )−f ( y )
this is a scalar. The derivative of f with respect to y is ∂ y f =lim , which is a
δ →0 δ
multivector. The chain rule is that a ∙ ∂ x ( f ∘ g )=( a∙ ∂ x g ) ( ∂ g f ) . This is product, where the first term
is a scalar and the second is a multivector. Note that if we would follows elementary calculus, I
would expect the chain rule to be ( ∂ g f ) ( a ∙ ∂ x g ). And there, the order doesn’t make a difference.
But in the chain rule here, the order is important.
Let’s take an example, where g ( x )=x 2, and f ( g )=g2 so the multivector is a scalar. So
2
( f ∘ g )( x )= ( x2 ) =x 4. The a -derivative of g at x is
1 1
lim ( g ( x +ϵ a ) −g ( x ) )=lim ( x 2+ ϵ 2 a2+ 2 ϵ x ∙ a−x 2) =lim ( ϵ a2+ 2 x ∙ a )=2 x ∙ a
ϵ→0 ϵ ϵ →0 ϵ ϵ→ 0

And the derivative of f at 2 x ∙ a is elementary calculus,

1 1
lim ( f ( 2 x ∙ a+ϵ )−f ( 2 x ∙ a ) )=lim ( 4 ( x ∙ a )2 +ϵ 2 +4 ϵ x ∙ a−4 ( x ∙ a )2 ) =lim ( ϵ + 4 x ∙ a ) =4 x ∙ a
ϵ→0 ϵ ϵ →0 ϵ ϵ →0

So the a -derivative of f ∘ g at x is ( 2 x ∙ a ) ( 4 x ∙ a )=8 ( x ∙ a )2. This is wrong, see below.

Dorst example, ( f ∘ g )( x ) where g ( x )=|x| and f ( τ )=τ k where k is an integer. Recall that for
scalars α , β , ( √ α −√ β )( √α + √ β ) =α −β . Now the a -derivative of g at x is

1 1 1 1 ( √ x 2+ ϵ 2 a2 +2 ϵ x ∙ a− √ x 2 )( √
lim ( g ( x +ϵ a ) −g ( x ) )=lim (|x +ϵ a|−|x|) =lim ( √ x 2+ ϵ 2 a 2+ 2ϵ x ∙ a−√ x 2 ) =lim
ϵ→0 ϵ ϵ →0 ϵ ϵ →0 ϵ ϵ →0 ϵ √ x 2+ ϵ2 a2 +2 ϵ
x
The derivative of f with respect to τ is just elementary calculus, ∂ τ f =k τ k−1. Here τ =a ∙ . The
|x|

( )( ) ( )
k−1 k
x x x
a -derivative of f ∘ g is a ∙ ∂ x ( f ∘ g )= a ∙ k a∙ =k a∙ . This is also wrong. The
|x| |x| |x|
x
mistake is that when substituting into τ , I should use τ =|x| in ∂ τ f and not a ∙ which is the
| x|

result of the left derivative. So the result should be a∙ ( |xx|) k|x|k−1 k−2
=( a ∙ x ) k |x| .

Also in the example above, g ( x )=x 2, and f ( τ )=τ 2, I made the same mistake. It should be thus:
2 2
a ∙ ∂ x g=a ∙∂ x x =2 x ∙ a, and ∂ g f =2 g=2 x . So altogether
2 2
a ∙ ∂ x ( f ∘ g )=( a∙ ∂ x g ) ( ∂ g f ) =2 ( x ∙ a ) 2 x =4 ( x ∙ a ) x .
In Dorst derivation he doesn’t use the chain rule. He seems to omit all terms which have ϵ i as a
multiplicand, where i>1. So he uses ( 1+ z )γ =1+γz . Presumably he does that because he knows
that all those terms will eventually vanish when we substitute ϵ=0. I indicate all those terms as ⋯
. So

(√ x 2 ( 1+2 ϵ x−1 ∙ a+⋯ ) ) −( √ x 2 )k

k k k k
k
|x+ ϵ a| −| x|
k
( √ x 2+2 ϵ x ∙ a+ ⋯ ) −( √ x 2) ( √ x 2 ) ( √ 1+
a ∙ ∂ x|x|=lim =lim =lim =lim
ϵ →0 ϵ ϵ →0 ϵ ϵ →0 ϵ ϵ→ 0

8.6 Vector Differentiation

Let us recall the notion of reciprocal frames from NFCM exercise (1.11) page 261. Dorst discuss
that in section (3.8) page 89. Given a not necessarily orthonormal basis b i, i=1 , ⋯ , n,

n I n = ( B∗I n ) I n
B=b 1 ∧ ⋯ ∧b n is a pseudoscalar and let I n be the unit pseudoscalar. Then B=B I −1 −1

−1
−1 In
and B = −1 . Its reciprocal frame b i, is defined to be (−1 )i−1 ¿ . By construction, b i is
B∗I n

orthogonal to b 1 ∧ ⋯ ∧ b̆i ∧⋯ ∧ bn, so it must be orthogonal to each of b j where j ≠ i. But b i need

not be parallel to b i, unless b i is also orthogonal to each of b j where j ≠ i, which is why the
reciprocal frame of an orthogonal frame is itself an orthogonal frame, and each vector in the
orthogonal frame is parallel to its pair vector in the orthogonal reciprocal frame. Show that
j j
b i ∙ b =δ i .

j (−1 ) j−1
bi∙ b = ¿
B∗I −1n

Note that just because a ∙ b=1, does not imply that ab=1. Indeed, ab=1 implies that a ∥ b and
−1 a
b=a = , but it may well be that a ∙ b=1 and a ∦ b and b ≠ a−1.
a∙a
Show that b i ∧b i=0 . This is equation (3.35) page 93. Dorst has the derivation in the solution file,
but I’ll work it out for the case n=3
i 1 2 3 1
b i ∧b =b1 ∧b + b2 ∧ b +b3 ∧b = ¿
B∗I −1
3

Using equation (3.21) page 79, this equals

1
¿
B∗I −1
3

−1 b2 ∧ b1
Now let’s work it out for the case n=2. ( b 1 ∧ b2 ) = 2 2 2 .
b b − ( b1 ∙b 2 )
1 2

1 2 1
b 1 ∧b + b2 ∧ b = 2 2 2
¿
b b −( b1 ∙b 2 )
1 2
 1 −1
Finally let’s work it out for the case n=1. b 1 ∧b =b1 ∧b 1 =0 .
Similarly,
¿
While we are at the n=3 case, note that
I −1 b 2 × b3
b 1=( b2 ∧b 3 ) B−1 =b2 ∧ b3 n
−1
=
B∗I n B∗I −1
n

−1
2 −1 In b 3 × b1
b =−( b 1 ∧b 3 ) B =b3 ∧b1 −1
= −1
B∗I n B∗I n

I −1 b 1 ×b 2
b 3=( b1 ∧b 2 ) B−1 =b1 ∧ b2 n
−1
=
B∗I n B∗I −1
n

If we want to avoid the orthonormal basis, we can express everything in terms of the frame itself.
Let

| |
b23 b2 ⋅ b3 b 1 ⋅b 3
2
D=( b3 ∧b2 ∧b 1)∗( b 1 ∧ b2 ∧ b3 ) = b2 ⋅ b3 b22 b 1 ⋅b 2 =b 3 ( b 1 ∧ b2 )∗( b2 ∧b1 ) + ( b2 ⋅ b3 ) ( b1 ∧b2 )∗( b 1 ∧b 3 ) + ( b1 ⋅ b3 ) ( b
2
b1 ⋅ b3 b1 ⋅ b2 b1

1 1
b= ¿
D
−1
b 2= ¿
D
3 1
b= ¿
D
Let x be a vector. Then x=x i bi=x i bi (summation convention here and in what follows). Now

x ∙ bi =( x j b j ) ∙b i=x i and x ∙ bi =( x j b j ) ∙b i=x i. So x=( x ∙b i ) bi=( x ∙b i ) bi. If the frame is orthonormal,

so it’s equal to its reciprocal, then we have x=( x ∙b i ) bi ≡ ( x ∙ b ) b .

i i

Coming back to section 8.6. We have a vector x on a subspace Rm of a vector space Rn. Let
{ei }i=1 be a not necessarily orthonormal basis for Rm. So x=( x ∙b i ) bi=x i bi.
m

m m
Going back to differentiation. We now denote the reciprocal frames as { e i }i=1 and { e i }i=1. So we
have m directional derivatives, e i ∙ ∂ x. If we have a function f whose domain are vectors, define
 i i ∂
∂ x f ( x )=ei ( e i ∙ ∂ x f ( x ) ). Dorst also writes it suggestively ∂ x =e ∂x ≡ e i
i (equation (8.12)). It is
∂x
∂
based on Dorst claim that e i ∙ ∂ x = i , since by definition,
∂x
∂ f ( x e j)
j
∂f (x) 1 1
∂x
i
=
∂x
i
=lim
ϵ→0 ϵ
( f ( x 1 e 1+ ⋯+ ( x i +ϵ ) e i+ ⋯+ x m e m )−f ( x 1 e1 +⋯ + x i e i +⋯+ x m e m ) )=lim ( f ( x + ϵ e i )−f ( x ) ) =e i
ϵ →0 ϵ

In NFCM section 2.8 page 105, Hestenes denotes ∂ x as ∇ (called Nabla or Del). Also there on
∂ f ( x +ϵ a )
page 106, he claims that a ∙ ∂ x f ( x )= ¿ ϵ =0 .
∂ϵ
∂ f ( x+ ϵ a ) f ( x + ( ϵ +τ ) a ) −f ( x +ϵ a ) f ( x +τ a )−f ( x )
¿ϵ =0=lim ¿ ϵ =0=lim =a ∙ ∂ x f ( x )
∂ϵ τ →0 τ τ→0 τ
Let f ( x ) be a scalar valued function defined by x ↦ x j. Then
∂ f (x) 1 1
e i ∙ ∂ x f ( x )= =lim ( f ( x +ϵ ei ) −f ( x ) ) =lim ( x j+ ϵ δ ij −x j ) =δ ij
∂x
i
ϵ→ 0 ϵ ϵ →0 ϵ

j
∂x j
In practice, we often write i
=δ i .
∂x
Writing ∂ x as a limit
i i 1
∂ x f ( x )=e ( e i ∙ ∂ x ) f =e lim
ϵ →0 ϵ
( f ( x+ ϵ ei ) −f ( x ) )
Example. f ( x )=x ∙ a, for some fixed vector a .
i i 1 i 1 i 1 i
∂ x f ( x )=e ( e i ∙ ∂ x ) f =e lim
ϵ →0 ϵ
( f ( x+ ϵ ei ) −f ( x ) )=e lim ( ( x+ ϵ e i ) ∙a−x ∙ a )=e lim ( x ∙a+ ϵ ei ∙ a−x ∙a )=e lim ( ei ∙a
ϵ →0 ϵ ϵ →0 ϵ ϵ →0

Example. f ( x )=x 2.
1 1 1 2 2 2
f ( x+ ϵ e i )−f ( x ) ) =e lim (( x +ϵ e i )( x+ ϵ e i )−x )=e lim ( x + ϵ e i + 2 ϵ e i ∙ x−x )=e lim
i i i 2 i 2 i
∂ x f =e ( e i ∙ ∂ x ) f =e lim
ϵ →0 ϵ ( ϵ →0 ϵ ϵ→0 ϵ ϵ →0

0
Another way. Using the example of the a -derivative of f ( x )=| x|k, ( e i ∙ ∂ x ) f =2 x ∙e i| x| =2 xi , so
i i
∂ x f =e ( 2 x i ) =2 x i e =2 x .
j k 2 j k j k
Dorst has another way. He writes x=x e j=x e k , so f ( x )=x =x ∙ x=x e j ∙ x e k =x x e j ∙ e k . Now
i i j k j k
∂ x f =e ∂x f =e ∂ x x x e j ∙ ek . Note that in ∂ x x x e j ∙ e k, i is fixed. Now there are n2 terms in
i i i

x x e j ∙ e k and 2 n of them include e i, namely, x x e i ∙ e k (no summation over i ) and x x e j ∙ ei (no

j k i k j i
 i k k i
summation over i ). Now ∂ x x x ei ∙ e k =x e i ∙e k (no summation over i ) since ∂ x x =1. Similarly,
i i

j i j j k
∂ x x x e j ∙ ei=x e j ∙ ei (no summation over i ). And when k ≠ i≠ j , then ∂ x x =∂x x =0. So
i i i

∂ x x j x k e j ∙ e k =x k ei ∙e k + x j e j ∙e i
i

So
∂ x f =e ∂x x x e j ∙ e k =e ( x ei ∙ ek + x e j ∙ ei ) =e ( e i ∙ ( x e k ) + ( x e j ) ∙ e i)=e ( e i ∙ x+ x ∙ ei ) =2 e ( x ∙ e i )=2 x i e =2 x
i j k i k j i k j i i i
i

Example. Let f ( x )=x 2, g ( x )=x . So f ( x ) g ( x )=x 3 . Differentiate using the product rule.
i 1
ϵ →0 ϵ
( 2 2 i 2 1
ϵ →0 ϵ
i
) (
∂` x f` g+ ∂` x f g̀= e lim (( x+ ϵ e i ) −x ) x + e x lim ( ( x +ϵ e i) −x ) =e 2 ( x ∙e i ) x+ e x e i=2 x +m x =( m+ 2 ) x
i 2 2 2 2
)
Differentiate directly using the limit definition,

( x+ ϵ e i ) −x
3 3
( x 2+2 ϵ ( x ∙ e i ) ) ( x+ ϵ ei ) −x3 3 2
x + x ϵ ei +2 ϵ ( x ∙ ei ) x−x
3

=e ( x e i+ 2 ( x ∙e i ) x ) =( m+
i i i i 2
e lim =e lim =e lim
ϵ →0 ϵ ϵ →0 ϵ ϵ →0 ϵ
i ∂
Using the e technique is a mess.
∂ xi
Recall that
1 1
lim ( f ( τ ) g ( τ +ϵ )−f ( τ ) g ( τ ) )= ∂` τ ( f g̀ ) =f ∂` τ g̀=f ( τ ) lim ( g ( τ +ϵ )−g ( τ ) )
ϵ→0 ϵ ϵ→0 ϵ

Also
1 1
lim ( f ( x ) g ( x+ ϵ a )−f ( x ) g ( x ) ) =(a ∙ ∂` x ) ( f g̀ )=f ( a ∙ ∂` x g̀ ) =f ( x ) lim ( g ( x +ϵ a ) −g ( x ) )
ϵ→0 ϵ ϵ→0 ϵ

Now Dorst writes ∂ x f =¿ . In Table 8.1 it has ∂ x ∙ x=m where m is the dimension of the space
where x resides. Let x=x j e j . So
¿
Now let’s try the next entry in the table, ∂ x ∧ x =0.

( )
j
∂ ∂x i
∧ ( x e j ) = i e ∧e j=δ i e ∧e j=e ∧ ei=e ∧e 1+ ⋯+ e ∧e m=0 as above.
i j j i i 1 m
∂x ∧ x = e i
∂x ∂x

Now suppose that f is a function which takes a vector to a vector. Or f ( xi e i )=f i ( x ) e i where f i ( x )

is scalar valued. Then ¿, which is the divergence. Example, f ( x )=( x ∙ x ) e1 + ( a∙ x ) e2 + ( b ∙ x ) e 3

where a , b are fixed vectors. Now
f 1 ( x 1 e1 + x 2 e2 + x 3 e3 ) =( x 1 e1 + x 2 e2 + x 3 e 3 ) ∙ ( x 1 e 1+ x2 e 2+ x 3 e 3 )=x 1 x 1 e1 ∙ e1 + x 1 x 2 e1 ∙ e2 + x 1 x 3 e1 ∙e 3 + x 2 x 1 e2 ∙e 1 + x 2 x 2 e
 1
∂ f ( x)
1
=2 x 1 e 1 ∙ e 1+ 2 x 2 e1 ∙e 2 +2 x 3 e 1 ∙ e3
∂x

f ( x e 1+ x e2 + x e3 ) =( a e1 +a e 2+ a e3 ) ∙ ( x e1 + x e 2 + x e 3 ) =a x e 1 ∙ e1 + a x e1 ∙e 2 +a x e 1 ∙ e 3+ a x e 2 ∙ e1 + a x e
2 1 2 3 1 2 3 1 2 3 1 1 1 2 1 3 2 1 2 2

2
∂ f ( x) 1 2 3
2
=a e1 ∙ e 2 +a e 2 ∙ e2 + a e3 ∙ e2
∂x
f ( x e 1+ x e2 + x e3 ) =( b e1 +b e 2+ b e3 ) ∙ ( x e1 + x e 2 + x e 3 ) =b x e1 ∙ e1 +b x e 1 ∙ e 2 +b x e 1 ∙ e 3+ b x e2 ∙ e1 +b x e
3 1 2 3 1 2 3 1 2 3 1 1 1 2 1 3 2 1 2 2

3
∂f (x) 1 2 3
3
=b e1 ∙e 3 +b e 2 ∙ e 3+ b e3 ∙ e3
∂x
So
¿
Next suppose that f ( x ) is scalar valued. Then ¿.
i ∂ f ( x)
Now let f ( x ) be a scalar valued function. Then ∂ x f ( x )=e i which is the gradient, so ∂ x f ( x )
∂x
2 2 2
is a vector. Example, Let f ( x )=f ( x e 1 + y e2 + z e3 ) =x + y + z . Then

1 ∂ ( x2 + y 2 + z 2 ) 2 ∂ ( x 2 + y 2 + z 2) 3 ∂ ( x 2+ y 2+ z 2 ) 1 2 3
∂ x f ( x e 1+ y e2 + z e3 ) =e +e +e =2 x e +2 y e +2 z e
∂x ∂y ∂z
8.6.1 Elementary results of vector differentiation
The first example is f ( x )=x . ∂ x x=¿ . We worked out both cases above, and we got m+0=m
where m is the dimension of the space on which x resides.
Second example page 232, also entry 9 in Table 8.1 page 226. f ( x )=a ∙ x . We did that example
above using the limit definition. Here we assume that a is a fixed vector in n dimensional space,
and x resides on an m dimensional manifold where m ≤n , and P I ( a ) is the projection of a on the m

tangent plane to the manifold at x . Dorst gives an example where m=n−1=2 and x resides on a
sphere. The problem with that example is that a sphere is not a subspace, it doesn’t contain the
zero vector, and adding two vectors on the sphere is not a vector on the sphere. So to describe x
on the sphere requires three components, just like a . But if m=n−1=3 , then indeed we can talk
about the projection of the 4 dimensional vector a onto the 3 dimensional space where x resides.
But this has nothing to do with a sphere in 3 space. First assume that m=n.
∂ i ∂
i(
x e j ∙ ak e ) =e i(
x a k e j ∙ e ) =e δ i ak δ j =a j δ i e =a i e =a
i j k j k i j k j i i
∂ x x ∙a=e
∂x ∂x
Dorst writes it differently
∂ i ∂
i(
x e j ∙ a ek ) =e i(
x a e j ∙ ek ) =e δ i a e j ∙ e k =e a ei ∙ e k =a ( e k ∙ ei ) e =a e k =a
i j k j k i j k i k k i k
∂ x x ∙a=e
∂x ∂x
Actually Dorst writes e i ak ei ∙ ek =ai e i which is confusing, since he switches i∧k . Now let’s
assume that m<n. We shall not use summation convention.
m m m m j m m m
∂ ∂x
∂ x x ∙a=∑ ∑ ei i(
x j e j ∙ a ) =∑ ∑ e i i ( e j ∙ a ) =∑ ∑ e i δ ij ( e j ∙ a ) =∑ e i ( ei ∙ a )=P I ( a )
i=1 j=1 ∂x i=1 j=1 ∂x i=1 j=1 i=1
m

Example page 233, also entry 10 in Table 8.1 page 226. ∂ x x ∧a . Assume m=n. Use summation
convention. Recall e i ∧ ei =0, e i ∙ e i=δ ii=m .
∂
i(
x e j a ) −a=e e i a−a=( e ∙ ei ) a+ ( e ∧ ei ) a−a=m a+0−a=( m−1 )
i j i i i
∂ x x ∧a=∂ x ( xa−x ⋅a )=∂ x ( xa )−∂x ( x ⋅a )=e
∂x
Directly

∂ x x ∧a=e i
( ∂∂x ( x e ∧ a))=e ( e ∧a )=¿
i
j
j
i
i

Now suppose that n> m. We have an m dimensional manifold, which means that the tangent
plane to the manifold at x is an m dimensional linear space. So we have a local basis
{e 1 , ⋯ , em , e m+1 , ⋯ , e n }, namely a basis where m of the base vectors are in the tangent plane, and the
other n−m base vectors are not. And when we calculate the derivative, only { e 1 , ⋯ , em } are in the
limit because the changes in x are only in the tangent plane.

∑( )
m m m
1
e i lim
ϵ →0 ϵ
( ( x +ϵ e i) ∧ a−x ∧a ) =∑ e i ( ei ∧a )=∑ ¿ ¿
i=1 i=1 i=1

m n
In general ∑ ( e ∧ ei ) ≠ 0, only ∑ ( e ∧ ei ) =0. So altogether,
i i

i=1 i=1

m m
e ( ei ∧a )=m a−P I ( a )=m ( PI ( a ) + P ( a ) )−PI ( a )+ ∑ ( e ∧ e i ∧ a )=m P ( a ) + ( m−1 ) PI ( a ) +∑ ( ei ∧e i ∧ a )
i
m m
⊥
Im m
i ⊥
Im m
i=1 i=1

This is not like Dorst.

Professor Clawson thinks that Dorst made a mistake here. CAGC in chapter 2 discusses
differentiation on linear spaces and not manifolds. Further, in equations (1.38, 1.39) he brings the
formulas ∂ x ¿ , ∂ x ( x ∧ A )=( n−r ) A , where A is a fixed r -blade and A=P ( A ). That means,
according to Professor Clawson, that x is in a subspace of dimension n which A is a subspace of
dimension r and r ≤ m. This is not like Dorst, where a resides in a subspace of dimension ≥ than
the subspace where x resides. So there is not error in CAGC equation (1.39), but there is an error
in Dorst.
Professor Clawson points out, then in general, the result of differentiation on manifolds, namely
the changes are restricted to be in the tangent plane, is not confined to the tangent plane. The
simplest example in the unit circle in a plane, parametrized by x=cos θ + I sin θ where I is the
unit pseudoscalar of the plane. Then y=xI is perpendicular to x , so at every point x on the unit
circle, y is a unit vector in the tangent “plane” to the circle. So at each point x on the unit circle,
we can set a local base for the entire plane, namely x∧ y , and y is the base of the tangent “plane”
and I =x ∧ y . The y -directional derivative of y, is
1
( y ∙ ∂x ) y=( y ∙ ∂x ) xI=lim ϵ ( ( x+ ϵ y ) I−xI )= yI=xII =−x . So the y -directional derivative of y is
ϵ→0

perpendicular to the tangent “plane”, even though the change in x is only in the tangent “plane”.
1 1
Further ∂ x y =∂x xI= y lim ( ( x +ϵ y ) I−xI )= yyI =I . And ∂ x x= y lim ( ( x + ϵ y )−x ) = yy=1.
ϵ →0 ϵ ϵ→ 0 ϵ

Example. ∂ x|x|. Use the chain rule and the product rule.
∂ 1 i −1 ∂ x j x k 1 1 1
i √
−1 −1 −1
∂ x|x|=e i x j
e j ⋅ x k
e k = e |x| e j ⋅ e k = ei|x| ( δ ij x k + x j δ ki ) e j ⋅e k = ei|x| ei ⋅ ( x k e k ) + ei|x| ( x j e j ) ⋅e
∂x 2 ∂x
i
2 2 2
Try use the definition.

1 1 1 ( √ ( x+ ϵ e i ) ∙ ( x +ϵ e i )−√ x ∙ x
i
∂ x|x|=e ( ei ∙∂ x )|x|=e lim
i
(|x +ϵ e i|−|x|)=e i lim ( √ ( x +ϵ ei ) ∙ ( x+ ϵ ei ) −√ x ∙ x )=e lim ϵ
i

ϵ →0 ϵ ϵ →0 ϵ ϵ →0
√ ( x+ ϵ e ) ∙ (
i

k
Now let’s derive ∂ x|x| where k is an integer. This is CAGC page 51 equation (1.35). Using the
first method, using the chain rule twice and the product rule,
−1
k ∂ k k−1 ∂|x| k−1 ∂ √ x ∙ x k−1 1 ∂ x ∙ x k i k−2 ∂ j k k−
∂ x|x| =e | x| =k e i|x|
i
=k e i|x| =k e i|x| ( x ∙ x) 2
= e |x| x e j ⋅ x k e k = ei|x|
∂x
i
∂x
i
∂x
i
2 ∂x
i
2 ∂x
i
2
The adjoint. Given a linear function f which takes a vector to a vector, let x , y be vectors.
Calculate ∂ y ( f ( y ) ∙ x ) . Let’s use the definition.
i i 1 i 1 i 1
∂ y ( f ( y ) ∙ x ) =e ( ei ∙∂ y ) ( f ( y ) ∙ x )=e lim
ϵ →0 ϵ
( f ( y +ϵ ei ) ∙ x−f ( y ) ∙ x ) =e lim ( f ( y ) ∙ x + f ( ϵ e i ) ∙ x−f ( y ) ∙ x )=e lim ϵf ( e
ϵ→0 ϵ ϵ →0 ϵ

i i
Now for any vector x , x=x i e = ( x ∙ ei ) e . So for any function f which takes vectors to vectors,

f ( x )=( f ( x ) ∙ e i ) e . Now by definition, the adjoint of f , denoted f , is defined implicitly by

i
f ( x ) ∙ y =f ( y ) ∙ x . So ∂ y ( f ( y ) ∙ x ) =( f ( ei ) ∙ x ) e = ( e i ∙ f ( x ) ) e =f ( x ). So we have a direct definition of
i i

the adjoint, using differentiation.

Example. Let f ( x )=x ×a for some fixed vector a . This is a linear function which takes vectors to
vectors. So f ( x )=( ( x × a ) ∙ e i ) e . On the other hand,
i

1 1
i
f ( x )=∂ y ( f ( y ) ∙ x )=∂ y ( ( y × a ) ∙ x )=e lim
ϵ →0 ϵ
( ( ( y +ϵ e i ) × a ) ∙ x−( y × a ) ∙ x )=e lim ( ( y × a ) ∙ x + ( ϵ ei × a ) ∙ x−( y × a ) ∙ x )=
i

ϵ →0 ϵ

Now ( x × a ) ∙ ei= ( a ×e i ) ∙ x=− ( e i × a ) ∙ x . So f =−f or f ( x )=a × x .

8.6.2 Properties of vector differentiation
Here comes the explanation of the commutativity of the scalar differentiation. In the product
rule, if f , g are functions from scalars to multivectors, then ∂ τ ( fg )=( ∂ τ f ) g+ f ( ∂τ g ). But if f , g are
functions from vectors to multivectors, then we can’t write ∂ x ( fg )=( ∂ x f ) g +f ( ∂ x g ). Rather, we
have to write ∂ x ( fg )=∂` x f` g+ ∂` x f g̀.
Let us compare the two, using Dorst example, f ( x )=g ( x )=x . So f ( x ) g ( x )=xx =x2 . We know
that that ∂ x ( fg )=2 x . Compute

( i 1
ϵ →0
) (
i 1
ϵ →0
i
)
( ∂ x f ) g+ f ( ∂x g )= e lim ϵ ( x+ ϵ ei−x ) x + x e lim ϵ ( x +ϵ ei −x ) =( e ei ) x+ x ( e e i) =( e ⋅e i+ e ∧e i ) x+ x ( e ⋅ e i+ e ∧e
i i i i i

which is wrong. Now compute

( 1
ϵ →0 ϵ
) ( 1
)
∂` x f` g+ ∂` x f g̀= e i lim ( x +ϵ ei −x ) x+ e i x lim ( ( x+ ϵ e i )−x ) =ei e i x +e i x ei =m x +e i ( x ⋅e i ) +e i ( x ∧e i )=m x+ ( x ⋅ e
ϵ→ 0 ϵ

So this is correct.
Dorst has a different calculation. He claims that ∂` x x x̀ =∂` x ( 2 x̀ ∙ x )− ∂` x x̀ x . Check it out.
1
∂` x x x̀ =e x lim ( ( x +ϵ e i) −x )=e x e i=( 2−m ) x
i i

ϵ →0 ϵ
1
∂` x ( 2 x̀ ∙ x )=2 ei lim ( ( x+ ϵ e i ) ∙ x−x ∙ x ) =2 ei ( e i ∙ x )=2 x
ϵ→ 0 ϵ

1
∂` x x̀ x =e lim ( ( x+ ϵ ei ) x−xx ) =e e i x=m x
i i

ϵ→ 0 ϵ

Show ∂` x x x̀ =∂` x ( 2 x̀ ∙ x )− ∂` x x̀ x . For any blade A , ¿, so Ax=(−1 )r ¿. So ∂` x A x̀=(−1 ) ¿. In our

r

case, in ∂` x x x̀ , the first x is considered a fixed vector, not a variable, so A=x and r =1. So
∂` x x x̀ =−¿.
 i
But the vector derivative, ∂ x =e ( ei ∙ ∂x ) can’t be written in the limit format, which is why

∂` x ( f ( x ) g̀ ( x ) ) ≠ f ( x ) ∂x g ( x ), So ∂ x ( fg )=∂` x f` g+ ∂` x f g̀.
The other product rule, f ∂ g=f` ∂` g+ f ∂` g̀ , equation (1.24b) in CAGC page 50, is derived from the
definition, supplied to me by Professor Clawson, that

f` ( x ) ∂` x =
∂ f (x) i
∂x
i [ 1
]
e =( ∂x ∙ ei ) e i= lim ( f ( x +ϵ e i )−f ( x ) ) ei
ϵ→ 0 ϵ

∂f ∂f
The rational is that just like ∂ x f =e
i
i , so
f` ∂` x = i ei , and the ❑
` tells us that ∂ x is meant to
∂x ∂x
operate on the left, and is not just an operator like ∂ standing all alone without a function on the
left or the right.
i ∂f ∂f i
Note that ∂ x ∙ e i=e i ∙ ∂ x, but of course e ≠ e . Based on that, f ∂ g or f` ∂` g̀ is by definition
∂ xi ∂ xi
f ( ∂ g ) + ( f ∂ ) g and then one can prove that
i
∂f e g 1 1
=lim ( f ( x+ ϵ e i ) ei g ( x+ ϵ e i )−f ( x+ ϵ ei ) e i g ( x +ϵ ei ) )=lim ( f ( x+ ϵ e i ) ei g ( x+ ϵ ei )−f ( x +ϵ ei ) e i g ( x ) +f ( x +
ϵ →0 ϵ ϵ →0 ϵ
i
∂x
Professor Clawson explained to me that one can invert that point of view. Namely, f` ∂` g̀ indicates
i ∂
that ∂ operates on both f ∧g. But how? Now since ∂ x =e ``
i , we can write f ∂ g̀ as
∂x

( )
`
i ∂
f` ( x ) e i
` s indicates operation on the left and the right. So it makes sense to define
g̀ ( x ). The ❑
∂x

( )( )()
`
i ∂ ∂
f` x e g̀ x ≡ i ( f ( x ) e g ( x ) ) and the e i just stays where it was. Then one can prove that
i
i
∂x ∂x
∂
i
( f ( x ) e i g ( x ) ) =f` ( x ) ∂` x g ( x ) +f ( x ) ∂`x g̀ ( x ), as we did above.
∂x
Chain rule. Let y=g ( x ) be a function which takes a vector to a vector. And let f be a function
which takes a vector to a multivector. Then ∂ x [ ( f ∘ g ) ( x ) ]=∂x ( f ( g ( x ) ) ) =∂ x ( g ( x ) ) ∂ y ( f ( y )) . This is
wrong. there are here two separate differentiations, which then are multiplied.
Let’s take Dorst example. Let y=g ( x )=( x ⋅a ) b. Let f ( x )=x 2. So ( f ∘ g )( x )= ( x ⋅a )2 b2. Now
1 1
2 2 2 i
∂ x ( x ⋅ a ) b =b e lim
ϵ →0 ϵ
( ( ( x +ϵ ei ) ⋅a ) −( x ⋅ a ) )=b e lim ( ( x ⋅ a ) +2 ϵ ( x ⋅ a ) ( e i ⋅a ) +ϵ ( ei ⋅ a ) −( x ⋅a ) )=b e lim ( 2 (
2 2 2 i

ϵ→0 ϵ
2 2 2 2 2 i

ϵ →0
I could use the chain rule intuitively as follows. b 2 is a constant. The derivative of ( x ⋅ a )2 is
2 ( x ⋅ a ) ∂ x ( x ⋅ a )=2 ( x ⋅ a ) a. So altogether we have 2 ( x ⋅ a ) a b 2.
But let’s see what the wrong formula gives.
1
i
∂ x ( g ( x ) )=e lim
ϵ →0 ϵ
( ( ( x +ϵ ei ) ⋅ a ) b− ( x ⋅ a ) b )=e ( e i ⋅a ) b=ab
i

1
i
∂ y ( f ( y ) ) =e lim
ϵ→0 ϵ
( ( y + ϵ e i )2− y 2 )=2 ei ( y ∙ ei )=2 y =2 ( x ⋅ a ) b
So altogether we have ∂ x ( g ( x ) ) ∂ y ( f ( y ) )=( ab ) ( 2 ( x ⋅a ) b ) =2 ( x ⋅ a ) b a . So the wrong formula gives
2

the right result here.

1
The correct formula is: Let a i=lim
ϵ→ 0 ϵ
( g ( x + ϵ e i )−g ( x ) )=( ei ∙ ∂x ) g ( x ) . Then

1
∂ x [ ( f ∘ g ) ( x ) ]=e ( ( ai ∙ ∂ y ) f ( y ) ) =e lim
i i
ϵ(
f ( y+ ϵ ai )−f ( y ) ), and substitute here y=g ( x ) and
ϵ →0

∂g(x)
a i= i .
∂x
Do the example using the correct formula.
1 1
a i=lim ( g ( x + ϵ e i )−g ( x ) )=lim (( ( x+ ϵ ei ) ∙ a ) b−( x ⋅ a ) b )=( e i ∙ a ) b . And
ϵ→ 0 ϵ ϵ →0 ϵ

1 1
f ( y+ ϵ ai )−f ( y ) )=e lim ( ( y+ ϵ ai ) − y )=2 e ( y ∙ ai )=2 e ( ( x ⋅ a ) b ) ∙ ( ( e i ∙ a ) b ) =2 e ( e i ∙ a ) ( x ⋅ a ) ( b ∙b )=2 b ( x
i i 2 2 i i i 2
e lim
ϵ →0 ϵ ( ϵ →0 ϵ

.
Now we can adapt the CAGC page 48 equation (1.15), for the case where there are two functions
y=g ( x ) which takes a vector to a vector, and a function z=f ( y ) which takes a vector to a
multivector. the a -direction derivative of a composite function ( f ∘ g )( x ) , namely ( a ⋅ ∂x ) ( f ∘ g )( x )
is

[
[ ( a⋅ ∂x ) g ( x ) ] [ ∂ y f ( y ) ] = lim
ϵ→ 0 ϵ
1
( g ( x +ϵ a )−g ( x ) ) ][ i
e lim
ϵ →0
1
ϵ
( f ( y+ ϵ ei ) −f ( y ) ) ]
And in the second one, after the differentiation, substitute g ( x ) for y . Again this is wrong. It
should be thus. Let b=( a ⋅∂ x ) g ( x ). Then ( a ⋅ ∂x ) ( f ∘ g )( x )=b ∙ ∂ y f ( y ) . Calculate b ∙ ∂ y f ( y ) and in
the result substitute y=g ( x ) and b=( a ⋅ ∂ x ) g ( x ). Or in one line

( a ⋅ ∂x ) ( f ∘ g )( x )=( ( a ⋅ ∂ x ) g ( x ) ) ∙∂ y f ( y ) where y=g ( x ). In a few places above I wrote that chain

rule thus ( a ⋅ ∂x ) ( f ∘ g )( x )=( ( a ⋅∂ x ) g ( x ) ) ∂ y f ( y ) as if it is a geometric product, but it really is an
inner product.
Example, ( f ∘ g )( x ) where y=g ( x )=|x|=√ x ∙ x and f ( y ) = y k where k is an integer. So in this case,
g takes a vector to a scalar y=g ( x ), and f takes a scalar y to a multivector z=f ( y ). So here the
formula would be

[
∂ x ( f ∘ g ) ( x ) =[ ∂ x g ( x ) ][ ∂ y f ( y ) ] = e i lim
ϵ→0
1
ϵ ( ][ 1
g ( x+ ϵ ei )−g ( x ) ) lim ( f ( y + ϵ ) −f ( y ) ) =
ϵ →0 ϵ ][ ]
x
|x| [ ]
[ k y k−1 ]= x [ k |x|k −1 ] =k
|x|
If we want the a -derivative of ( f ∘ g )( x ) , the formula is
1
[ 1
][ x
][ ]
( a ⋅ ∂x ) ( f ∘ g )( x )=[ ( a ⋅ ∂x ) g ( x ) ] [ ∂ y f ( y ) ]= lim ϵ ( g ( x +ϵ a ) −g ( x ) ) lim ϵ ( f ( y +ϵ )−f ( y ) ) = a ∙ [ k y ]= a∙
ϵ→0 ϵ →0 |x|
k−1 x
|x| [ ][
We can derive that formula without the chain rule, using Taylor series.

((√ ( )
2
1 1 1 a
lim ( ( √( x +ϵ a ) ∙ ( x +ϵ a ) ) −( √ x ∙ x ) )=lim (( √ x ∙ x +2 ϵ x ∙ a++ϵ 2 a2 ) − ( √ x ∙ x ) )=lim
n n n n 2 −1 2
x 1+2 ϵ x ∙ a+ ϵ 2
ϵ→0 ϵ ϵ →0 ϵ ϵ→0 ϵ x

√
2
a
Now we can ignore the ϵ 2 term in −1
1+2 ϵ x ∙ a+ ϵ
2
, so we are left with √ 1+2 ϵ x−1 ∙ a. Let
x2
y=2ϵ x ∙ a. Then we have √ 1+ y . Take the Taylor series of that,
−1

√ 1+ y=√ 1+ y ¿ y=0 +
d
dy
√ 1+ y ¿ y=0 y +⋯=1+
1
2 ( √ 1+1 y ) ¿ y=0
1
y +⋯=1+ y+ ⋯
2
1
Let z= y . Then we have ( 1+ z )n. Take the Taylor series of that,
2
d n n
( 1+ z )n=( 1+ z )n ¿ z =0 + ( 1+ z )n ¿z =0 z +⋯=1+n ( 1+ z )n−1 ¿ z=0 z+ ⋯=1+ nz+ ⋯=1+ y +⋯=1+ 2 ϵ x −1 ∙ a+⋯=1+nϵ x −
dz 2 2

( (√ ) )
n
2
1 a 1 n 1 n
1+2 ϵ x ∙ a+ϵ 2 −|x| =lim (|x| ( 1+nϵ x−1 ∙ a ) −|x| ) =lim (|x| nϵ x−1 ∙ a ) =|x| n x−1 ∙ a=n x ∙ a|x
n −1 n 2 n n
lim |x|
ϵ→0 ϵ x ϵ →0 ϵ ϵ →0 ϵ

I find Dorst explanation and notation confusing.

Example from Table 8.1 and CAGC page 51 equation (1.36). The space dimension is n . We
derive it in three ways.
First way, use only the limit definition

( ) (
1 | x| ( x +ϵ e i )−|x| ( 1+ kϵ ( x ∙ e i) ) x
k k

( )
k k −1
1 |x| ( x +ϵ ei ) −|x +ϵ ei| x
∂x
( )
| x|
x
k
=e lim
1 x+ ϵ ei
i

ϵ →0 ϵ |x +ϵ e |
i
k
−
x
| x|
k
=e
i
lim
ϵ →0 ϵ
k
|x + ϵ e i| |x|
k
=e
i
lim
ϵ →0 ϵ
k
|x +ϵ ei| |x|
k
Second way, use the chain rule and the product rule. There are three functions. f ( x )=x . g ( x )=|x|
. h ( y )= y −k . Altogether we have, f ( x ) ( h ∘ g ) ( x ) .
`
∂ x f ( h∘ g )=( ∂x f ) ( h ∘ g )+ ∂` x f ( h ∘ g )
Now ∂ x f =n .
1 1 −k
∂` x f ( h∘` g )=e x lim (|x +ϵ e i| −|x| )=e x lim (|x| ( 1−kϵ x ∙e i ) −|x| )=−e x|x| k x ∙ e i=−| x| k ( x ∙ e i) e
i −k −k i −1 −k i −k −1 −k i

ϵ→ 0 ϵ ϵ →0 ϵ

So altogether we have

( ∂ x f ) ( h ∘ g ) + ∂` x f ( h ∘` g ) =n|x| −k |x| = ( n−k )|x|

−k −k −k

∂
Third way, use the i notation which employs the chain rule and the product rule
∂x

[ ]
j
∂ | |−k i ∂ x | |−k ∂ −k
e x + x i |x|
i
e i
x x =e i j
∂x ∂x ∂x

[ ( )] [ ]
1
∂
|x| =ei e i|x| −k|x| x ∂ i ( x ∙ x )2
−k −k−1 −k −k−1
¿ e δ e j|x| + x −k |x|
i
i
j
i
∂x ∂x

[ −k
¿ e i ei|x| −k |x|
−k −1
x ( 12 |x| ) ∂∂x x ∙ x ]=e [e |x| − k2 |x|
−1
i
i
i
−k −k−2
x
∂ j l
∂ xi
x x e j ∙ el
]
i

[−k k −k−2
¿ e ei|x| − |x|
2
x
∂ j l j ∂ l
∂x
i
x x +x
∂x
i
x e j ∙ el
(( ) ( )) ]
i
[
−k k −k−2
¿ e ei|x| − |x|
2
x ( δi x + x δ i ) e j ∙ e l
j l j l
]
[ −k k −k−2
¿ e i ei|x| − |x|
2
−k k −k−2
x ( xl e i ∙ e l+ x j e j ∙ e i ) = ei e i| x| − |x|
2 ] [
x ( e i ∙ x + x ∙ ei ) ]
i
[ −k
¿ e ei|x| −k |x|
−k−2
] −k
x ( ei ∙ x ) =n|x| −k |x|
−k−2 i −k
x e ( e i ∙ x ) =n|x| −k |x|
−k−2 2
x =|x| ( n−k )
−k

In Table 8.1 there is also the example

(
1 |x| ( x +ϵ a )−|x| ( 1+ kϵ ( x ∙ a ) ) x
) ( )
k k −1 k k

( )x
a ∙ ∂ x k =lim
1 x +ϵ a x
(
− k =lim
|x| ϵ → 0 ϵ |x+ ϵ a| |x| ϵ →0 ϵ
k
1 |x| ( x+ ϵ a )−|x +ϵ a| x
k
|x +ϵ a| |x|
k
)
=lim
ϵ →0 ϵ
k
|x +ϵ a| |x|
k
=lim
ϵ→

CAGC page 51 equation (1.37), ∂ x ( log| x|). Here we use the chain rule, where y=g ( x )=|x| and
f ( y ) =log y . So we use the formula

∂ x ( f ∘ g ) ( x ) =[ ∂ x g ( x ) ][ ∂ y f ( y ) ] =
[| | ] [ ]
x
x
1
=
x
y |x|| x|
=x−1
CAGC page 52 equation (1.33) ∂ ∧ x=0. By definition
i 1 i
∂ ∧ x=e ∧lim
ϵ
( x + ϵ e i−x )=e ∧e i=0
ϵ→ 0

CAGC page 52 equation (1.34) ∂ x=n . By definition

i 1 i i i
∂ x=e lim
ϵ
( x+ ϵ ei−x ) =e e i=e ∙e i +e ∧ ei =n+0=n
ϵ →0

CAGC page 52 equation (1.38). Let A=P ( A )=⟨ A ⟩r =¿ j=1¿ r e j be a fixed blade of grade r . So
A represents a subspace. Suppose there is a subspace B such that A is a subspace of B. Then let
C= A B, or AC=B . So C is an ( n−r )-blade which represents the subspace which is the
−1

orthogonal complement of A relative to B. Let { e r +1 , ⋯ , en } a basis for C , so { e 1 , ⋯ , er ,e r +1 , ⋯ , en } is

n
a basis for B. Let x be a vector in B which may or may not be in A . So x=∑ x ei . We need to
i

i=1

show that ∂ x ¿ .
Actually we don’t need here this apparatus. Given a basis { e 1 , ⋯ , en } for B and A=¿ j=1 ¿ r ai , we
have
∂x ¿
Now
n

∑ ¿¿
i=1

Next
n

∑ ei ∧¿ ¿
i=1

n
CAGC page 52 equation (1.39). Let x=∑ x ei and let A=¿ j=1 ¿ r a j.
i

i=1

n n n
1
∂ x ( x ∧ A )=∑ e lim ( ( x+ ϵ e i ) ∧ A−x ∧ A )=∑ e ( e i ∧ A )=∑ e ( e i ∧ a1 ∧ ⋯ ∧ ar )
i i i

i=1 ϵ→0 ϵ i=1 i=1

r
Next use the fact that a j=∑ a j e k for j=1 , ⋯ , r . So a 1 ∧ ⋯ ∧ar =α e1 ∧⋯ ∧ er
k

k=1

n n n n

∑ ei ( e i ∧ a1 ∧ ⋯ ∧ ar ) =∑ α ei ( e i ∧ e1 ∧⋯ ∧ er )= ∑ e i ( ei ∧ A ) = ∑ ¿¿
i=1 i=1 i=r +1 i=r+1
 n
Now, ∑ e i ∙ ei =n−r . And since e i ∙ e j =0 if i≠ j, and here i>r and A contains e j where j ≤ r , so
i=r +1

¿. Also

( )
n r n n n

∑ (e i ∧ e i ∧ A )=∑ ei ∧ ( e i ∧ A ) + ∑ (e i ∧e i ∧ A )=∑ ( e i ∧ ei ∧ A )= ∑ ( ei ∧e i ) ∧ A=0

i=r +1 i=1 i=r +1 i=1 i=1

So altogether, ∂ x ( x ∧ A )=( n−r ) A .

CAGC page 52 equation (1.40). Recall from above that Ax=(−1 )r ¿ so
∂` x ( A x̀ )=∂ x ¿
1
∂ x ( (−1 ) ( x̀ A ) ) =(−1 ) e lim
r r i r i r

ϵ→0 ϵ
( ( x+ ϵ ei ) A−xA ) =(−1 ) e e i A=(−1 ) n A

∂x ¿

So altogether, ∂` x ( A x̀ )=(−1 ) n A+ (−1 ) 2r A=(−1 ) ( n−2 r ) A .

r r +1 r

Now Dorst in Table 8.1 page 226 entry 11, seems to consider the case where the vectors of A are
in the embedding n dimensional space, while x resides on an m dimensional submanifold, so the
tangent plane is m dimensional. So only P I ( A ) is relevant, since the differentiation is on the
m

tangent hyper plane to the submanifold on which x resides. So ∂` x ( x̀ A )=m P I ( A ). In entry 12, hen

has ∂ x ¿ . That is consistent with CAGC page 52 equation (1.38). But entry 13 is problematic just
like entry 10.
See a bit more on chapter 8 of Dorst in my notes on MacDonald “A survey of GA and GC” page
22.