Change in a vector upon rotation of the coordinate frame

AI Thread Summary
The discussion centers on understanding the change in a vector A due to rotation in a coordinate frame, specifically using the equation ΔA = ΔΦ x A, where ΔΦ is a vector perpendicular to the rotation plane. Participants clarify that this equation is valid for small rotations and emphasize the distinction between ΔΦ and the gradient of a scalar potential, grad(Φ). The conversation highlights the importance of representing rotations as vectors, with direction determined by the right-hand rule. Additionally, it is noted that the cross product is essential for determining the new position of the vector after rotation. Overall, the thread aims to clarify the mathematical representation of angular changes in vector quantities.
Jigyasa
Messages
18
Reaction score
0

Homework Statement


Hi everyone. We were discussing conservation of angular momentum as a consequence of rotational invariance in class. There was one point where we needed to compute the change in a vector A when the coordinate frame is rotated by angle Δ(Φ).

Homework Equations


The teacher said that ΔA = ΔΦ x A (cross product), where ΔΦ is a vector perpendicular to the plane of rotation. I am not sure if I understand this equation correctly.

The Attempt at a Solution


This is how I understand it:
Consider rotation in the x-y plane. As Φ is an angle in the x-y plane, grad(Φ) will be in the direction of the outward normal (z direction). Now, (grad(Φ) x A) will give the direction of A

The problem is, I think I'm mixing up grad(Φ) and the vector ΔΦ. Can someone help?
 
Physics news on Phys.org
Jigyasa said:
ΔA = ΔΦ x A (cross product), where ΔΦ is a vector perpendicular to the plane of rotation.
That is only valid for small rotations. For example, consider a radius vector length r in the plane and subjecting it to a small rotation dθ. The endpoint moves by rdθ at right angles to the radius vector. If we represent the rotation by a vector normal to the plane then we can write the new radius vector as ##\vec r'=\vec r+\vec r\times\vec{d\theta}##.
Jigyasa said:
grad(Φ)
No, grad is an entirely different beast. If you see grad(φ) written then almost surely the φ is very different too. It would be a scalar potential as a function of position, ##\phi=\phi(\vec r)##. grad(φ) would be the vector formed by the partial derivatives of φ along the different coordinates.
 
haruspex said:
That is only valid for small rotations. For example, consider a radius vector length r in the plane and subjecting it to a small rotation dθ. The endpoint moves by rdθ at right angles to the radius vector. If we represent the rotation by a vector normal to the plane then we can write the new radius vector as ##\vec r'=\vec r+\vec r\times\vec{d\theta}##.

No, grad is an entirely different beast. If you see grad(φ) written then almost surely the φ is very different too. It would be a scalar potential as a function of position, ##\phi=\phi(\vec r)##. grad(φ) would be the vector formed by the partial derivatives of φ along the different coordinates.

How do you take the direction of dθ

I understand till the equation is in magnitude form. To convert it into vector form, I need to write dθ as a vector and then take its cross product with A
 
Jigyasa said:
How do you take the direction of dθ
A rotation can be represented by a vector with magnitude proportional to the extent of rotation and direction indicating the axis. It is not very useful for large rotations, but normally only used with infinitesimal ones and, thus, for derivatives - angular velocity and angular acceleration.
A convention is needed to decide which way along the axis the vector points. As far as I know, the right-hand rule is universal. If in your view of the rotation it is clockwise then the vector points away from you. This convention requires a corresponding convention for the cross product and the equations involved. E.g. tangential velocity is ##\vec r\times\vec \omega##, not the other way around.
 
Understood. Thanks a lot :)
 
Kindly see the attached pdf. My attempt to solve it, is in it. I'm wondering if my solution is right. My idea is this: At any point of time, the ball may be assumed to be at an incline which is at an angle of θ(kindly see both the pics in the pdf file). The value of θ will continuously change and so will the value of friction. I'm not able to figure out, why my solution is wrong, if it is wrong .
TL;DR Summary: I came across this question from a Sri Lankan A-level textbook. Question - An ice cube with a length of 10 cm is immersed in water at 0 °C. An observer observes the ice cube from the water, and it seems to be 7.75 cm long. If the refractive index of water is 4/3, find the height of the ice cube immersed in the water. I could not understand how the apparent height of the ice cube in the water depends on the height of the ice cube immersed in the water. Does anyone have an...

Similar threads

Back
Top